MASTER 

NEGA  TIVE 

NO.  92-81151 


MICROFILMED  1993 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or 
other  reproductions  of  copyrighted  material. 


archives  are  a 


reproductio 


m^k 


Under  certain  conditions  specified  in  the  law,  libraries  and 

uthcrized  to  furnish  a  photocopy  or  other 
One  ot  these  specified  conditions  is  that  the 
photocopy  or  other  reproduction  is  not  to  be  "used  ^or  any 
purpose  other  than  private  study,  scholarship,  or 
research      ?      user  makes  a  request  for,  or  later  uses,  a 
photoccpv  or  reproduction  for  purposes  ir  excess  of  "fair 
use,   tnat  user  may  be  liable  for      p /right  infringement. 

This  institution  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to  accept  a 
copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 

would  invcf'-".^  -;-:M;-i^-or  n^  '^^X'   ""-^-^DV-'Ulh:  :JW. 


AUTHOR: 


MONDS,  THOMAS 


T 


LEY 


T 


0^wr "«     1W  m 


-tSi^ 


I  n 


STRE 


THE  ELDER  SE 


TED 
CA 


PLACE: 


LTIMORE 


D  A  TE : 


896] 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  # 


BIBLIOGRAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARGET 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


87S05 
FS 


■ n 

Simonds,  Thomas  Stanley,  1862- 

Tho  themes  treated  by  the  elder  Seneca;  dis^er-  ! 
tation...  by  Thomas  Stanley  Simonds,  BaltimoJ^e , 
Friedenwald ,  ^1896] 

100  p.   23|-  cm. 

Biblio(praphy,  p.  98-100. 

Thesis   (Ph.D.)»  Johns  Hopkins  university,   1896 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


384nft7 


FILM     SIZE: 


^ 


t^ 


;?7 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 

//a 


REDUCTION     RATIO: 


IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA  (UA^  IB     IIB  _ 

DATE     FILMED:___^-j^3J. INITIALS_^l^/.l 

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODBRIDGE.  CT 


c 


V 


Association  for  Information  and  Image  Management 

1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

12        3        4         5 

iiiiliniliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 


UJ 


6         7        8 

iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 


9        10       11        12       13       14       15    mm 

iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


rrr 


TTT 


Inches 


1 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


Li^  128 

2.5 

yo    "' III" 

1^    l£ 

2.2 

U     1^ 

■**       140 

2.0 

u 

1-  ^ 

1.8 

1.4 

1.6 

IT  I 


MPNUFflCTURED  TO  fillM  STRNDPRDS 
BY  APPLIED  IMAGE,  INC. 


01 


(li 


*d 


(/» 


»    r 


'm 


■i      •     - 

ffl     The  Themes  Treated  by  the 


Elder  Seneca 


8?Se5 


TS 


©olumbiu  ^luiucvsitiT 
in  the  CCitvj  of  IJlcxu  ^lovU 

XibvavM  • 


GIVEN     BY 


DISSERTATION 


Presented  for  the  Degree  of  Ph.  D.,  Johns  Hopkins  University 

June,  1896 


BY 


THOMAS  STANLEY  SIMONDS 


ZU  ^or6  (gafttmore  (prcee 

THE  FRIEDENWALD  CO. 

BALTIMORE,    MD. 


m 


1I 


r       The  Themes  Treated  by  the 

Elder  SeftexJa^ :  u 


::- 


•••  i  r 


•  •  •  • 


•  •  •- 


•  • 


*  • 


'0 

•  •  •  •  « 


DISSERTATION 


Presented  for  the  Degree  of  Ph.  D.,  Johns  Hopkins  University 

June,  1896 


BY 


THOMAS  STANLEY  SIMONDS 


Z^t  Bov^  (gafttmore  (pttetf 

THE  FRIEDENWALD  CO. 

BALTIMORE,    MD. 


CONTENTS. 


t  •  • 


I     •  •  •  « 
•  •     • 
•  •      • 


•  ••  • 


-    • 


•  •    •  •  • 


•  •  • 
•  •  » 


* 


•  • .  •  • 


\ 


U3 
CO 


J 


\ 


\ 


'^ 


PART    I. 

i  iciacc ,, ,.     ,,    ..,.,,,,., 

I. — Rhetoric  in  general 

1.  Evolution  of  the  late  rhetoric 

a.  Asian  schools 

b.  Causes  of  the  decline  of  Greek  oratory 

2.  Political  and  social  conditions  favoring  the  evolution  of  rhetoric 

at   Rome 

a.  Oratory  among  the  Romans 

b.  Decay  of  oratory  at  Rome 

II. — The  Roman  rhetoricians 

1 .  Their  position  in  the  new  fabric  of  the  state 

2.  Their  method  of  instruction 

a.  Various  kinds  of  declamations  in  the  imperial  period.  - . . 

b.  Character  of  the  declamations  of  the  imperial  period. . . . 

c.  Influence  of  rhetoric  on  other  branches  of  literature 

3.  The  character  and  attainments  of  the  rhetoricians 


PAGB 

s 

7-14 

7 
8 

8-9 

9 

9-12 

12-14 

15-3S 
15-17 
17-20 
21-22 

23-33 
33-35 
35-38 


PART    II. 

I. — Seneca  the   Elder 39-52 

1.  His  life 39-42 

2.  His  character 42-44 

3.  His  writings 44-47 

4.  Value  of  his  rhetorical  wriciugs 47-50 

5.  His  attitude  toward  rhetoric  and  rhetoricians 5C-52 

II. — MSS.  and  editions  of  his  rhetorical  writings 53-5^ 

'•     M^^ 53-55 

55-56 

PART    III. 


Editions 


I. — The  sources  of  the  Suasoriae  and  Controversiae 57-68 

II. — Classification  of  the  subjects  of  the  Suasoriae  and  Controversiae  68-70 
III. — Parallels  of  the  subjects  discussed  in  the  Controversiae  of  Se- 
neca, the  Declamations  of  the  pseudo-Quintilian,  and  Cal- 

purnius  Flaccus 71-81 

IV. — The  legal  aspects  of  the  Controversiae 82-98 

Bibliography 98-100 


^ 


O^^ 


277528 


I 


i 


!•• 


> 


\ 


'V 


PREFACE. 

The  writings  of  Seneca  the  Elder,  as  well  as  the  declamations 
preserved  under  the  names  of  Quintilian  and  Calpurnius  Flaccus, 
mtroduce  us  to  a  peculiar  and  characteristic  phase  of  mental  and 
literary  activity.  This  activity  has  neither  the  charm  of  youth 
nor  the  repose  of  maturity,  but  is  rather  that  of  degeneration  and 
decay.  Antique  mental  life  is  presented  in  these  writings  as  it 
verged  on  its  second  childhood,  and  it  will  not  be  without  interest 
to  sketch  briefly  on  the  basis  of  Seneca's  writings  this  phase  of 
classical  literature,  to  state  its  causes  and,  as  far  as  may  be,  to 
trace  to  their  sources  the  examples  of  it  which  remain. 


T 


\ 


/ 


\ 


<. 


^ 


1 '  > 


>    •  I 
•  •   > 


>  t  t  •    •  *  , 


•  *  ,  •  •    »   t 

,    ^    '  .    •      It       • 


»  •    •       •   • 

I  »    »  »  •      »  • 


•    •      »  ■ 


•       ,       J       » 


PART  I. 
I. — Rhetoric  in  general. 

I.  Evolution  of  the  late  rhetoric. 

Of  all  the  species  of  Roman  literature  none  traces  its  origin 
to  Greece  more  directly  than  rhetoric,  and  it  will  not  therefore  be 
withnnt  advantage  to  consider  briefly  rhetoric  as  distinguished 
from  the  old  orntory  among  the  Greeks. 

It  was  Isocrates  who  gave  to  Greek  eloquence  its  finish 
and  pc]i>ii  ami.  what  is  perhaps  of  greater  importance,  iniused 
into  it  an  ethical  element.  It  attained  its  height  in  Demosthenes. 
Arisluiic-  HI  Ins  Rhetoric  gave  it  a  scientific  basis.  But  very  early 
there  manifested  itself  in  oratory  a  tendency  to  go  astray,  which 
provoked  thu  censure  o{  Isocrates,"  and  the  sharp  attacks  of 
Plato.'  Its  decline  was  steady.  After  the  downfall  of  Athenian 
freedom  scarcely  one  great  orator  can  be  mentioned.  Signs  of 
deca\-  or  at  least  of  a  lack  ol  productiveness  are  already  shown 
ill  Dinarchus,  who  was  an  imitator.'  The  style  also  became  lax 
and  weak.'  In  subjugated  Athens  there  was  no  longer  a  field  for 
oratorv,  which  accordingly  emigrated  to  the  free  and  fiourishing 
cities  of  Asia-Minor.  There  it  exhibited  great  activity  but  in  a 
dreadhilly  artificial  and  distorted  manner.  We  refer  to  the 
so-called  Asian  style. 

'  ('f.  Blass,  Dte  ■^rieihiscJic  Bendsaynkcit,  p.  7S  sq.;  Geschichtc  dcr  attiscJien 
F't  rcdsarnknt  ii,  i>.  41  ;  Spengel,  Ueber  das  Stiidnivi  dc7-  Rhetorik  ba  den 
Alt 01,  p.  8. 

-  Cf.  10  (Hel.)   I  scj.;    i  i  (Busir.)  9.  49. 

'  Cf.  Phaedr.  267  A  scj. 

^Cf.  Dionysius  Wi^Wc^.xwTi^'i.w'i,  Dc  Di7iarcho  judiciufti  c.  5  :  ".  .  .wiiyv 
a77h  Kill  -'II  A>/ii:)n\'if  I'/Kov  \'(if)nK7/]i)()r.  or  nd? inra  euiu?/aar(}\ ''^  Blass,  Di<^ 
griech.  lu-ytds.,  p.  15;  Susemihl,  Geschichte  der  griechischen  Litteratur 
in  dcr  Alexandrinerzeit,  1S92,  ii,  p.  461. 

•'("f.  Cicero,  De  oratore  ii,  23,  95  :  p<jsteaquani  extinctis  his  omnis  eorum 
mcmuria  sensim  obscurata  est  et  evanuit,  alia  quaedam  dicendi  moUioraac 
remissiora  genera  vigueruut. 


8 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


•  > 


•  •••    .      ••» 


who  lived  :tbf)^K.25o,U..G,Ais.-?^i*rded  as  the  founder  ur  at  any 
rate  the  torei)<T>t*n<;pr-sei>ta^.;v  ejoi;  %<«  A:.ian  school/  Hegesias's 
diction  was  nuiikvU  Uy  a.  ^tdying  after  metaphors  and  n-juies, 
an  indulgence  In  jrJr^fjslrci-  p^n^  and  puerile  witticisms,  and  by 
a  hick  of  di-nity  and  sincere  feeling.  In  his  attempt  to  imitate 
the  simple  periodic  structure  of  Lysias,  he  minced  evervth;ng 
into  short  sentences  to  uh;ch  he  added  the  frequeiu  use  of 
hyperbaton.-  It  n:av  be  said  in  general  that  the  Asinn  stvlc  is 
distinguished  from  the  old  Attic  by  its  affectation,  tnigaliv  of 
verbal  ornament,  aiul  inanity  of  thought.* 

b.    CciHses  of  the  decline  of  Greek  oraiory.—W'ha  Seneca  says 

m  reterence  to  R  )m.in  eloquence  is  applicable  t.>  tlu-  Gn,  ian 
also  and  to  human  achievement  in  general:  "  fato  (piodnn  cuius 
maligna  perpetiiaque  m  rebus  (.mnibiis  lex  est,  ut  ad  siiniminn 
perducta  rursus  ad  mfunum   velocius  (iuideni  (juam  ascender.mt, 

^'•f.    mass    Dij  griech,   Bereds.,  p.  25;    Susemihl,    Gesch.    der  griech, 

Liftcrat.  ii,  pp.  463  sq. 

Cf.  Strabo  xiv,  64S  :  '' avtSpeq  tV  tyevoirro  yvupifiot  Md'i'vrfTec  'Hy^a/af  re  6 
pr/Tup,  bg  7)p^e  fidliara  rov  'Ac^avov  7.tyofikvov  l^if^jov  6inil>^e!par  rb  Ka^earijc  l^og 
Tb  'Arr/Ao^  .  .  .  -  ;  Blass.  D/, gr:ec/i.  Bcreds..  pp.  5.  16,  following  Dion.  Ii.,1. 
De  ant,;,  orrj.  ;-;,.  i.  dates  the  Asian  >chu..I  „oi  tr..in  Ilcgesia..  l-ut  iV  )J 
the  death  of  AIexan<ier-  the  (ireat  a.ui  n.ako  ,t  hc^in  with  I)cinet.;us 
Phalereus,  who  died  ahuut  2S3  H.  C.  Cicero,  /,,,,/,•,  ix.  ;S,  .avs  of 
Phalereus:  "Hie  pnnius  inrl.xit  orationcn  et  ea.n  ino]ie„>  tenerain<iue 
reddidit  et  suavis,"  while  (^lintilian,  /nsiU.  orat.  x,  1,  Ss  consuic.  him  as 
having  had  "mukuni  ingeiiii  ct  tacuiidiae." 

^Cf.  Cicero,  Or.ito?-  Ixvii,  226  :  -  .  .  .  dun>  ille  quoquc  iniitari  !.v>iain 
vult  .  .  .  saltat  incidens  particulas.  Et  is  .juide.n  non  nnnu>  >enteP,tus 
peccat  quam  verbis,  ut  non  quaeret  (lueui  a;. pellet   nieptiuu.  qui    iliuni    ro^. 

i    (pii    illo   vitio,   (juoii   ah    Heuoia 


noverit";   loid.   Ixix,    _-,.):    '-Sunt   etian 


fluxit    infrin<;endis    concideiuiisnu 


e   nunicns    in    ciuoddani    -enus   abitu'ttiin 


incidant  versicuU.rum  simillin.um  '";  Dion.  Hal.,  /V  .o,^:rosU,,n.  rn^cmm 
c.  xviii,  who  quotes  from  the  History  of  Hegesias  to  i;iu>uate  hisstvle;  ,{. 
also  Blass,  Die ^ncch.  BercdsamkeH,  pp.  31  .q.  and  Su^ennhi,  G.sJi:c':Ud,r 
griech.  Litt.,  p.  467. 

'•For  a  more  detailed  description  of  the  Asian  style  compare  (^icer.-, 
Brutus  xcv,  who  distinguishes  two  divisions  r,f  it.  the  sententious  and  the 
verbose,  and  mentions  their  principal  representatives,  cf.  also  .'•;,/.  xir,  51. 
For  the  relation  of  the  Asian  scho<d  to  the  second  Sophistic,  which  received 
a  new  impetus  in  the  second  century  and  kept  itself  alive  until  the  end  o{  the 
old  Greek  civilization  in  the  sixth  century,  compare  Kohde,  Jh,  ,  ^riechische 
Roman,  pp.  290  sq.  and  in  Kncinisches  Murum  xli  (  1SS6),  p.   170-190. 


J 


V 


\     ) 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENEQA.      Q 

relabantnr."-     In  the  art  of  oratory  there  seems  to  be  an  inherent 
tendency  to  deviate  irom  simplicity  and  truth,  and  to  run  riot 
As  particular  causes  of  its  decay  in  Greece,  its  proper  home,  may 
be  mentioned  the  general  decadence  of  the  Greek  nation  •  true 
oratory  can  flourish  only   among  a  free,  patriotic,  high-minded 
people,  not  under  a  "  fierce  democracy  which  has  sunk  into  the 
lifelessness  of  a  cheerless  and  dishonored  old  age.""     Then   too 
there  was  the  chan-e  of  the  seat  of  artistic  speech  from  Attica  to 
Asia,  exuberant    and  exaggerating  in  all  things.     To   this  must 
be  added  the  absence  of  any  lively  political   interest;  as  liberty 
declined,  deliberative  discourse  was   deprived  of  its  real  object 
and  the  corruptness  of  the  courts  left  little  room  for  true  forensic 
oraiorv.      All  orations  became  more  or   less  show-speeches,  and 
the    speaker    could    indulge    only    in    rhetorical   commonplaces- 
havmg  no  attainable  object  before  him,  he  was  led  to  employ  all 
his  efforts  on  form  and  to  exhibit  his  art  in  ostentation  and  bom- 
bast.    Moreover,  there  had  come  into  being  a  subtle  and  minute 

deyeh.pment  ot  rhetorical  technique  which  of  necessitv  hindered,  if 
It  did  not  wholly  stifle,  spontaneous  heartborn  eloquence.  It  will 
be  seen  that  causes  precisely  similar  brought  about  the  decline 
of    Roman  oratory  also. 

2.  I'olifical  and  social  c and itiojis  favor ing  the  cvohdmi 

oj  rJieforic  at  Rome, 

a.  Oratory  amon^o^  the  AV;;/.?;/...— Next  to  Greece  no  country 
aflorded  a  grander  held  for  the  growth  and  display  of  oratorical 
genius  than  Rome.  If  the  Roman  character  lacked  the  elegance 
and  grace  of  the  Greek,  especially  the  Athenian,  this  was  counter- 
balanced by  a  dionity  and  gravity  of  speech  which  was  supported 
by  the  senatorial  system  and  which  was  never  reached  at  Athens. 
"  The  Roman  mind,  unlike  the  Greek,  did  not  instinctivelv  con- 
ceive the  pui)lic  speaker  as  an  artist.  It  conceived  him  strictly  as 
a  citizen,  weighty  by  piety  and  years  of  oftice,  who  has  something 
to  s  ly  for  the  i^ood  of  other  citizens,  and  whose  dignity,  hardly 
less  than  the  value  of  his  hearers'  time,  enjoins  a  pregnant  and 
severe  conciseness.'"^     The  practical  sturdy  Roman  of  the  earlier 

"^^  Brae/at  10  C\)ntro7ers.  i,  7. 

>'  Freeman,  J/istory  oj  Federal  Cover nmcut  i,  p.  221  ;   cf.  Seneca,  Braef. 
Controv.  i,  8  sq. 

'■"^Jebb,   The  Attn    Orators  ii,  p.  446. 


// 


\ 


lO 


THE    TIIK-MES    TRI'.ATf.U    iiV    THE    ELDER    bENECA. 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    FEXEC.\. 


II 


period  took  no  interest  in  theories  and  teehnirn]  treatises  on 
oratory.  Even  the  writing  down  ot  spt'cchc'S  atttr  deli\t  r\  was 
rarely  if  ever  resorted  to.' '  The  theory  and  techniqnc  ol  doqutnce 
do  not  begin  to  receive  attention  among  the  Romans  ht  lore  the 
middle  of  the  second  century  1^>.  C.  in  const  qutnce  of  the  great 
oratorical  activity  of  that  period,  all  the  wa^rks  ol  which  seem  to 
be  rhetorically  colored.  This  development  took  place  nnchr  the 
influence  of  Greece.  Rhetoric  was,  as  it  were,  the  inheritance  of 
the  Greek  nation,  and  when  her  own  independeiua-  was  at  an  tnd, 
it  was  to  Rome  that  her  children  carried  tlieir  talents.''  Many 
Romans  received  lessons  from  Greek  rhetoriciari-,  and  i>t  first  the 
Greek  language  was  predominantly  employed  in  ihetoru^il  exer- 
cises.'" There  was  at  first  a  strong  opj)os;ti(ai  at  Rome  to  Greek 
rhetoric  and  rhetoricians,  led  by  Cato  and  tho>e-  like-minded  to 
him  f'  but  after  the  Gracchi,  who  were  more  Hellenic  in  their 
tastes,  Greek  rhetorical  art  began  to  tx^rcise  a  cor.sidc  rable  in- 
fluence on  Roman  oratory,  and  belore  loc  H.  C.  llurid  Asiamsm 
had  its  admirers  at  Rome.'"  It  was  in  fact  in  its  As\an  form  that 
Greek  rhetoric  became  the  teacher  ot  tlie  Roman>.  but  it  was  ra)t 
until  about  90  B.  C.  that  L.  I^lotius  Galliis  and  otlu  is  otablished 
a  school  and  taught  the  principles  of  rhetoric  m  Latin. *'•*  Accoi cl- 
ing to  Blass,-  L.Crassus  (  140-91  H.  C.^  and  M.  .Antonins  i  143-S7 
B.  C.)  were  the  first  Roman  orators  who  were  intluenced  by  lleile- 

'■' Cf.  Seneca,  /'/"(/f/',  re;//;-.  1,9:  *' ille  enim  vir  (■>€.  Cnto)  qniri  nit  i*  orator 
est    .   .    .    7'ir  boi:H<  dicetui,  f'i  )itus.'^ 

"  Cf.  Blass,  Die  griec/usc/w  Jycredsarnktif,  \^Y>.  104  f.,  115;  Marx,  Chauvi- 
iiismiis  ic?idSihu!ri'fo!-fn^  p.   13. 

'•'•  Cf.  Cicero,  Jhiitus  Lxxxix.  310:  "  ConuuetitaLar  declan^itans  .  .  .  ; 
idque  faciebani  iiuiltuiii  ttiam  Latine,  se<l  (iraece  sacpius.  vel  (juoti  C'.raeca 
oratio  plura  ornanienta  suppeditans  consuctvidineni  .siun'.itcr  L.itine  (iicciuli 
adferebat,  vel  quod  a  Graecis  sumniis  doctoribus,  nisi  (iraecc  diccrcm 
neque  corrigi  posseni  neque  doceri";  Suetonius,  /-'c  cl.!r.  r^ict.:  "  Cict-ro 
ad  praeturam  usque  Graece  declaniavit,  Latine  vero  senior  quocpir.  .  .  .'' 

"•Cf.  Blass,  Die  i:;ricch.  /)V;-£-./V.,  pp.  105.  115;  Monun>cn,  K.^niiscJif  Ge- 
schichte  ii,  p.  246;   Marx,  op.  at.,  p.  12. 

1"  Ct.  Blass,  i'ud.;   Jfbb,   T/ie  Attn-  (hiit.'rs  ii,  \^\  446  sq. 

i»Cf.  Rohde,  /Jf?    i^iuchischc  R.^nuiiiy  p.  28S. 

I'' Cf.  Quintilian,  Instit.  Or.it.u,  4.42:  "Latinos  vero  dicendi  praecep- 
tores  extremis  L.  Crassi  tcniporil>us  coepisse  Cicero  auctor  est;  quorum 
insignis  maxime  Plotius  fuit";  Seneca,  Praej.  Conho:.  ii,  5;  Suetonius, 
De  cLir.  rhet.  2  ;  Cicero,  De  orat.  iii,  24,  93,  cf.  also  Marx,  Cu  !urifi:s»:us  loui 
Schiilreforui,  p.   15  ;    Cucheval,  Hist,  de  IWlc.;.  ro)/:.  1,  p.  zi.\. 

"•^^  Die  griech.  F^ereds.,  p.  120. 


"-i^ 


t 


X 


J  K 


} 


\  ■ 


nism.  M.  .Antonins  was  also  the  first  after  Cato  to  write  a  rhetori- 
cal treatise  in  Latm.'  The  most  important  work  on  the  subject 
is  the  treatise  Ad  Hercmiiiun,  ascrit)ed  to  Cornificius  and  probably 
written  some  years  previous  to  80  B.  C.  It  is  of  the  same  char- 
a'^ter  as  the  C^reek  manual  of  Anaximenes,*"  only  brought  up  to 
date  and  adapted  to  the  more  practical  requirements  of  Roman 
oratorv.'*''  Latin  rhetoric  indeed  always  remained  essentially  a 
Greek  forni  of  mental  discipline,  and  as  such  became  eyentually  a 
great  and  lasting  force  for  the  ruin  of  Latin  literature.*'  We  wit- 
ness at  Rome  a  repetition  of  the  process  which  took  place  in 
Greece.  The  different  styles  or  rather  manners  ol  oratory  arose 
in  succession  at  Rome;  the  pure  Asian  is  represented  by  Quintus 
riortensms;  the  Atlicizing  or  eclectic  style,  which  was  developed 
in  tile  Rhodian  school,  by  M.  Tullius  Cicero,'"  and  the  pure  Attic 
style,  upheld  a.m ong  the  Greeks  by  Dionysius  Halicarnassus,  by 
C.  Licinius  Calvus.'**  The  victory  of  the  old  Attic  oratory  over 
Asianism  at  Rome  and  in  Greece,  and  the  other  provinces  as  well, 
dates  from  about  60  B.  C,  but  even  from  the  middle  of  the  second 
century  a  reaction  had  set  in  against  this  unwdiolesome  and 
unnatural  outgrowth.  A  struL^gle  against  it  arose  in  Pergamum 
especially.'^'  He:m.igoras  of  Temnos  also  and  his  school  about 
the  middle  of  the  second  century  B.  C,  subtle  and  scholastic  as 
his  system  was,  "  did  good  service  by  reviving  the  conception  of 
oratory  not  as  a  knack  but  as  an  art,  and  so  preparing  men  once 

'-' Ct.  (J'nntilian,  Inst.  Orat.  iii,  i,  19;  Cicero,  Z-^/z/z/j- xliv,  163  ;  Dc  orat. 
I,   21,  94  ;    4S,  20S. 

--  It  is  also  called  Rhetor,  ad  Alexandrian  and  was  ascribed  to  Aristotle, 
but  it  is  now  generally  agreed  that  it  is  a  work  of  Anaximenes  of  Lamp- 
sacus  ;  Susemihl  alone  disputes  this,  and  thinks  it  originated  as  a  connect- 
ing link  between  the  Isocratean  and  Ilermagorean  methods  at  the  begin- 
ning or  iu  the  middle  of  the  third  century  B.  C. 

-^Cf.  Spengel,  Ueber  das  Siudiuni  der  RJietorik^  p.  102,  and  in  Rheinisch. 
Museiitn,  xviii  (1S63),  ]).  487. 

'^K,'f.  Marx,  CJiauiinisiniis  n.  Sc/iulref.,  pp.  17  .  18. 

'■^^  Cf.  Dion.  Hal.,  De  Din.jud.  c.  S;  Cicero,  Orator  viii,  25  ;  Briitiis  xiii, 
51  :  "  Khodii  saniores  et  Atticorum  similiores";  Quint.,  Inst.  Orat.  xii,  10, 
18  :  "  Genus  Rhodium  quod  velut  medium  esse";  comp.  also  Rohde,  Der 
i^rieeh.  Roman,  p.  289;  Susemihl,  Gesch.  der  griech.  Litt.  ii,  p.  489;  Wes- 
termann,  Gesehichte  der  Reredsavikeit  i,  p.  176  §  81,  and  Blass,  Die  griech. 
Beredsamkeit,  ]).  4  .89,  who,  however,  thinks  that  the  school  of  Rhodes  did 
not  deserve  the  credit  accorded  to  it. 

-^  For  a  characterization  of  him  comp.  Seneca,  Controv,  vii,  4,  6  sq. 

•'  Cf.  Susemihl,  Geseh.  der  grieeh.  Litt.  ii,  p.  482  sq. 


f      I 


) 


12 


Tin-:  T I [ K .\ 1 1£ s  T R I-: a t i-  d  v. y  Tin-: 


ELDER    SENECA. 


more  to  discern  the  true  artists  and  the  lalse."-'-  lUit  the  decisive 
battle  acrainst  Asianism  was  foui>ht  and  won  at  Roiiu-  especially 
throucrh  the  acrency  of  Apollqdorus  of  Peroanmni,  loo-iS  ]].  C, 
the  teacher  of  Augustus.-'  The  principal  cause  i..r  the  defeat  of 
Asianism  is  probably  the  fact  that  its  pompous  and  inane  jin^linjr 
could  not  satisfy  the  o-reat  and  practical  needs  of  Roir.an  i)uhlic 
Hie,  and  therefore  the  sturdy  Roman  orators  abandon(cl  their  liv- 
ing Asianic  teachers  for  the  immortal  masters  of  the  old  Attic 
eloquence. ^^ 

b.    Decay  of  oraiory  at  AW/^.— The  victory  of  old  Attic  oratory 
over  Asian  rhetoric  at  Roi-,e  was  of  short  duration.     "  Oiii(l<niid 
Romana    facundia    habet,  quod    m.^olenti    (iraciae    aut  'opp/,nat 
aut    praeferat.    circa    Ciceronem  eftloruit  ;    (unnia    ingmia,    (ju.e 
lucem    studiis    nostris    attulerunt    tunc    nata    sunt.      In    dcterius 
deinde  cotidie  data   res  est."  coniplain^  Seneca.'     As   has  la(n 
stated  already,  the  causes  ot   the  speedy  decadence  o!   oratorv  at 
Rome  are  about  the  same  as  those  which  brought  about  its  decline 
m  Greece.  "Siveluxu  temporum,"  continues  Seneca,— "  mini  enim 
tarn    mortiferum    ingeniis   quam    luxuria   est— sive   cum   ptetium 
pulcherrimae    rei    cecidisset,    translatum    est    omne    ceitanun   ;,d 
turpia    multo    honore  quaestucpie  vigentia.   .   .   ."      The   turning- 
point  tor  the  worse  should  be  placed  in  the  Augustan  period  u atli 
the  overthrow  of  republican  institutions,  as  in  Athens  the  duun- 
fall  of  liberty  drew  m   its  tram  tiiat  of  (Tatory  also,  for  true  elo- 
quence IS  the  child  of  Ifherty  as  on  tlie  other  hand  it  nouri.shes  and 
supports  it.      There  no  longer  existed   any  material   to  kindle  the 
fires   of  eloquence.^     Order  and   peace   and  quiet,— even    if  the 
quiet  of  a  cemetery,— now  prevailed  at  Rome  in  place  ol  the  former 

J'sjebb,  The  Attic   Orators  ii.  p.  445;   -n    I  Icriuagoras's  system  conipaie 
Ihiele,  Hnmagoras,  p[).    14-^  sq. 

^•'Cf.  Susemihl,  G,.c::uh.  de>  ^^r.  Litt.  ii,   pp.  473  .  502  sq.;  \\\2.^^,  Die gr. 
BereJs..  j)p.  3  .  149  .  iGo. 

'"Cf.  Kohde,  Der griech.  Kofn.:i:,  p.  289. 

'^  J'rae/atto  i'onf)-^:.  i,  6  sci. 

•'■''Cf.  Diulogus  de  orat^'rihi^  (ascrihcd  U)  'facitu>)  c.  30:  "Ma-na  clcpi- 
entia  sicut  rtamma  materia  alitur  et  motibus  cxcitatur  d  ureiulo  cIarc^clt 
.  .  .";  c.  4[:  "(Juid  enini  (sc.  at  the  preseiu  dav  as  cotnpareci  with  the 
former  time  of  the  republic)  opus  est  longis  in  senatu  sententiis.  cum 
optimi  cito  consentiant:*  quid  multis  apud  contionibus  cum  dercpuMica 
non  imperiti  at  multi  delibcretit,  sed  sapientissimus  et  unus  .  . .  .^ "  cc.  3O-4  1 
are  all  extremely  interesting  on  this  point. 


/ 


J 


\ 


J    \ 


t '  f 


TliE    TIIK.MKS    TKKATKD    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


13 


fierce  rivalries  and  contentions  of  parties  and  party  leaders     And 
soon  despotism  on  the  one  hand  and  its  counterpart  servility  on 
the  other,  attained  such  proportions  as  to  stifle  all  noble  and  high- 
spirited  thought  and  action.     Seneca  complains  bitterlv  over  the 
literary  aufo-da-fcs  which  came  into  use  in  his  time  for  the  di'^ci- 
phne   ot   refractory   minds.-     In  addition  to  this  the  prosperhy 
and   wealth  which  came  to  the  Roman  empire   under   Augustus 
contributed  their  part  toward  obliterating  all  remnants  of  the  old 
Roman  simplicity  and  engendering  a  taste  for  superficial  splendor 
and  a  striving  after  display.-     A  lively   scientific   and    literary 
activity  did  indeed  spring  up  ;-  circles  were  formed  for  the  promo- 
tion ot  culture  and  literary  taste;  we  need  only  recall  Maecenas 
This   age   in   the   mental   history  of  Rome  may  be    not   inaptly 
likened  to  that  of  Louis  the  Fourteenth  of  France.     But  what  this 
literary  activity  gained  in  breadth  it  lost  in  depth  and  earnestness 
of  purpose  ;  it  aimed  merely  at  the  brilliant,  the  piquant,  and  the 
interesting  ;  it  was  marked  by  flippancy  and  entire  subordination 
of  matter  to  form.     This  change  in  the  spirit  of  Roman  literature 
exhibited  Itself  m  the  evolution  of  that  diction  which  is  designated 
as  "  Sliver  Latin."     The  vocabulary  became  changed ;  new  words 
and  phrases  were  invented  and  many  of  those  hitherto  in    use 
were  lost  or  rejected  ;  the  syntax  was  simplified,  numerous  short 
sentences  replacing  a  less  number  of  long  ones  ;  the  useof  abstract 
substantives  became  frequent ;  in  the  periodic  structure  parataxis 
took   the  place  of  hypotaxis;   natural  expressions  gave  way  to 
rhetorical  figures  ;  the  lines  separating  prose  and  poetry  became 
obliterated  ;  objectivity  was  replaced  by  subjectivity  and  arbitrari- 
ness ;  sublimity  and  depth  of  diction  were  supplanted  by  an  arti- 
ficial  elegance.     Of  all  this  the  rhetors  represented  in  the  works 
clothe  elder  Seneca  are  the  type,  and  Quintilian  in  vain  opposed 
It."      This   great   change   in   the   tendency   and   aims  of  Roman 
literature  manifested  itself  in  the  most  marked  degree  in  the  art 

^Praif.  Coutr.  x.  5  sq.:  -  Effectum  est  enim  per  inimicos  ut  omnes  eius 
(sc.  r.  Labieni)  libri  comburerentur  ;  res  nova  et  inusitata  supplicium  de 
studiis  sumi  "  ;   cf.  also  ^^7. 

'^Cf.  llainmer,  Batriige  zu  dm  19  grossc;i  quiniiUamschen  Declamaiionen, 
P-  3- 

•*^Cf.  Hernhardy,  Grjindriss  der  romisc/ie?i  Liiteratiir,  p.  75.  Literary 
facts  as  well  as  explicit  testimonies  show  that  no  preceding  age  possessed 
more  susceptibility  to  fine,  sometimes  supernne,  form  or  a  more  cultivated 
taste. 

^'=Cf.  Koerber,  Uei'er  de7i  Rhetor  Seneca,  pp.  24  sq. 


H 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


of  eloquence.  Naturally  so,  for  this  department  of  mental  activity 
can  thrive  <uul  reach  its  normal  (hvelopnunt  ciiK'  in  <i  state  of 
political  freedo.n.  and  this  no  l()iii;fr  LXL->icd.  Un  tlic  ()th',-r  h.md 
speech-making  and  speech  hearino-  were  deeply  rooted  in  tlie 
Roman  nature.  Hence,  when  the  lorum  became  dull,  spcecli-mak- 
inf^  retired  to  the  schoolroom  to  continue  there  a  shach>\\y  lite. 
Rhetoric  supplanted  oratory,  rhetoricians  took  the  place  of  ora- 
tors, and  speakin^^  was  superseded  by  declaimino;.''  Yvi  another 
reason  for  tlic  development  <  a  those  schools  ot  rhetcHic  may  be 
found  in  the  tact  that  already  in  Cicero's  time  and  still  movr  after- 
wards, jurispruden>:e  attained  at  Rome  an  importance  beiore 
unheard  oi.  It  assumed  an  independent  position  .nal  treated 
rhetoric  as  it  had  been  treated  b}-  it — with  disregard.  The  orator 
when  in  court  found  himself  under  the  control  ot  the  jud^e,  by 
whom  he  w.is  compelled  to  lully  realize  his  suborcbnate  position 
and  to  conthie  his  discourse  closely  to  his  subject.""  Rhetoric, 
thus  driven  Irom  political  lile  and  repressed  m  the  (omts,  came 
to  be  treated  as  an  art  or  science  independent  oi  all  otlu  is,  au 
end  in  itself,  its  value  consisting;  in  the  formal  training  it  gave  tlie 
mind. 

^'  Even  in  the  time  of  the  elder  Seneca,  wheu  the  rhet(jricians  and  the 
rhetorical  schools  were  in  the  height  of  their  prosperity,  the  language  still 
distinguished  between  dicer-'  and  declamare^  as  also  between  orator  and 
rhetor  or  dcclamator.  Compare  Sen.,  Praef.  Controz'.  i,  12:  "ipsa  decla- 
matio  apud  nullum  rinti(]uuni  auctorem  ante  Ciceronem  et  Calvum 
inveniri  potest,  ciui  declaniatii.iK  in  a  dictione  distingua  ;  ait  enim 
declaniare  iam  sc  non  nifciiocritci .  diccre  bene  ;  alteram  iniMt  donic^- 
ticae  excrcitationis  cs>t',  alleruni  vt-rac  (iicticnis  .  .  .  ";  ('ontt.  wx,  i.  20: 
"  De  colore  ir.ter  maxinios  et  oratores  et  ciccianiatorcs  (!i  -  putatuni  est.  .  . 
Pasianus  et  Albucius  et  praeter  oratores  magna  novomm  rhetotum 
nianus  .  .  ."";  Suas.  vi,  ii  :  •' Itaciue  Cas>ius  Sevfrus  aiebat  alios  clecla- 
masse,  Varium  Geminum  vivuni  consilium  dedisse." 

'"Cf.  Speni;el,  Ue^er  das  Stnd:ur>i,  etc.,  p.  25.  Tacitus,  I)ial(\i;ns  c.  19: 
•'Qui  (sc.  indices)  vi  et  pote>tatc,  nun  iure  ant  lei^ibus  cof^noseunt,  nee 
accipiunt  tempora,  sed  con>tituunt,  ncc  expectaiulum  habent  oratorem 
dum  illi  libeat  de  ipso  nei^oiio  dicere,  >cd  saepe  ultro  admovcnt  atcjue 
alio  transgredientem  revocant  at  festmare  >e  testantnr  "  ;  fjuintilian,  lustit. 
Orat.  iv,  1,  72  ".  .  .  si  sit  praeparatus  satis  etiam  sir.e  hoc  index"";  iv, 
5,  10:   '•  P"estinat  enim  index  ad  id,  quod  potent;>sinium  est." 


f-^ 


/ 


\ 


il 


THE   THEMES    TREATED    BY   THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


IT. —The  roman  rhetoricians. 


15 


I.    Their  position  in  the  new  fabric  of  the  state. 

It  iias  l)een  already  stateci'  that  L.  Plotius  Gallus  was  the  first 
to  open  a  school  for  Latin  rlietoric  about  90  R.  C.  This  does  not 
of  course  imply  tliat  there  had  never  previously  been  instruction 
and  exercise  at  Rome  in  the  art  of  speech-making.  Thus  Lucius 
Praeconius  of  Lamivium,  surnamed  Stilo,  although  not  a  profes- 
sional teacher,  had  oathered  a!)(;ut  !iim  ten  years  before  a  select 
circle  ot  youn^  men  lor  tlie  purpose  of  reading  old  authors  and 
probai)ly  also  to  oive  them  some  training  m  the  thec^rv  and  prac- 
tice of  speecli-making.-"  Hut  before  Bhmdus  no  native  Roman  of 
position  had  be(  ii  a  professional  teacher  of  rhetoric,  the  ])rofession 
indeed  [)eaiL^  looked  upon  as  disgraceful  and  hence  practiced  only 
by  libcrfini.'^  Piotius  found  many  imitators  and  follouers.  In 
vain  It. id  tlie  censors  as  early  as  92  P.  C.  issued  an  edict  against 
these  schools.'-  Thev  rctuauicd  hencetorth  a  permanent  institu- 
tion ol  the  Roman  hanpire.  In  the  imperial  epoch  rhetorical 
schools  sprang  up  everywdiere.'^  It  was  tor  the  interest  of  the 
ruh'is  to  favor  their  establi>hment  and  development,  inasmuch  as 
thev  diverted  the  public  mind  from  the  great  constitutional 
changes  wluiii  liad  taken  place  and  caused  the  loss  of  public 
discussion  to  be  kit  less  keenly.  The  public  too  favored  these 
schools  because  in  them  dving  liberty  lingered  longer  than  in  the 
forum  and  the  senate,  which  were  under  the  immediate  control  of 
the  ^overmtient."  These  schools,  moreover,  met  the  demand  of 
the  times  tor  a  general  and  broad  culture.  As  it  had  been  for- 
merlv  claimed  by  Isocrates  that  oratory  should  be  regarded  as 
unitino;  in  itselt  all  the  element  of  culture'"'  and  that  even  the  name 


^^  Sec  above,  p.  10. 

***Ci.  Momn!>en,  R:'t}ii-c':e  Geschichte  ii,  p.  425. 


^' Cf.  .Seneca,  i'raef.  Contr.  ii,  5:  "  (^)ui  (sc.  Blandus)  primus  eques 
Romanus  Komae  docuit  ;  ante  ilium  inter  libei  tino.s  praeceptures  pulcher- 
nmae  disciplinae  continebantur  ct  minime  probabili  more  turpe  erat  docere 
quod  honestum  erat  discere." 

*'-Cf.  Cicero,  De  oatcre  iii,  24,93;   Gellius,  AV/^.r  Att.  x\\  11  ;   Tacitus 
/>id/.   c.  35;   Suetonius,  Ih'  clar.    rhet.  c.  I  ;   Cucheval,   Hnt.  de  V  e'loq.  rom 

1,   pp.    2  2-1    SCj. 

^■'Cf.  Hulsebos,  De  ediu.  ci  :nsf.  apud  Ko/n.,  p.  IC9. 
Ct.  Morawski,  J)£  rhet.  lat.,  p.  16. 


u 


^'N'^'.'^/.    (2)   5  sq.  39;    Ibziv/}.   (4)  47-49. 


l6     THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 

of  philosophy  should  be  bestowed  upon  it/*"'  so  now  a  training  in 
the  art  of  rhetoric  was  considered  as  the  foundation  of  a  liberal 

education  and  the  fitting  preparation  for  the  higher  wilks  of 
life.""  The  stndv  of  rhetnr-c  thus  hrld  nearly  the  same  place  as 
was  occupied  later  by  the  "  iiin}ianioray  Ever,  an  ethical  force 
was  ascribed  to  it.'"  Seneca  relates'  iiiat  Au-u,-iii>  was  present 
together  with  Agrippa  at  a  decLtmation  of  Latro,  and  that  the 
rhetor  Gains  Silo  was  also  heard  L-y  AuL;n>tns/'°  Later,  chairs  of 
rhetoric  were  ehtahlislied  and  endowed  1  v  th.e  state.''  Wspasian 
was  the  first  to  do  this.  '  Hadrian,  n  )ted  lur  his  Pinihellenisn], 
established  at  Rome  the  Athenacnni  which  was  hen(^ci(.rth  snp- 
ported  by  the  emperors  and  which  |)()ssc  ssfd  a  chair  oi  rhetoric.'^ 
The  emperors  themselves  entrusted  their  children  to  the  rlietor- 
ical  schools  for  education.  '  Marcus  Aurelins  att(  nded  the 
lectures  of  Hermo^^enes  even  atter  lie  i)ecanu'  empert.r.  It  may 
be  tairiy  assumed  that  most  ot'  the  large  cities  oi    Itaiv  had  their 

'^"  Kara  riiv  an<p.  (13)  i.  i  i  ;  Corf,  (d  P..  i  ;  Tzepl  dvTi<}.  (15)  270  sq.;  Eliv.  (66) 
6.  66.   (^f.  T'lass,  GcsJi.  der  attiscfui:  I' .reds,  ii,  pp.  26  sq. 

'■  Seneca,  Fiacf.  Cotiir.  ii,  3,  thu>  adth  c-st^  his  sun  Mtla  :  "  eh){|ucnti,ie 
tantum  studeas  ;  facilis  ah  iiac  in  oniacs  artcs  (iiscur^u^  e>t  ;  in>t i  uit  ctiani 
quos  n(»n  sibi  extrcet  "'  ;  cf.  also  Theo.  rrogynnuumata  {Rhetores  Gr.it.  /,  ed. 
Spengel.  ii,  70):  " /}  ritv  7Tf}())v/Lii>aa/LiaTuv  aoKT/mg  ov  fjLovov  roiq  fii'A'/MVOi  priTO- 
pevtiv,  a/.Aa  Kai  el  Tig  //  ttoitjtcjv  tj  ?.oynKoic}v  //  aX?iuv  tivuv  Aoyuv  (Vuvafiiv  i^e/.ei 
(j.eTax^LpiCea-&ai.     eoti  yap  ravra  olovei  ^efieAia  Tzdcjjq  Tfjg  riiv  Idyav  \i)i:aq  ..." 

*-  Cf .  Theo,  i/>id.  60  ;  "  Kai  ^t/v  1)  6ia  rfjq  XP^^^^  yv/umaia  ov  fxovov  nvd  iVvvafiiv 
koyuv  kpydC^eraiy  aAAa  kqI  x(»I<^'^ovti  ij^oq  kyyvjivaCofikvuv  ijfjLuv  rnlg  tuv  aoipcjv 
dTTocp^Eyfiaanr'  Anstuies,  Or.  45,  72  (ed.  Dindorf):  "  rerrapwv  otTon^  ^opiuv 
T^f  aperi/q  (sc.  (ppoif/aeioc,  acjcppoavvr/r^  diKaiuavvr]^^  dvdpeiag)  dnavTa  did  Trjg 
pr^ropiKi/g  TTEmHTfTai,  Kai  hirep  h  a6fia(ri  yv/uvaariKy  Kai  larpiKi/,  tovt'  ev  ti  (fnxjiKy  Kal 
Toig  T0)v  7t6ae(oi;  Trpdy/iaai  <p^ivETai  ;  "'  ct.  al^o  Rohde,  l):-r  gri.^.  ■[.  Kotn.in,  p. 
297  foot  note. 

'•*  Contr.  ii,  4,  12. 

■"' 6V;//;-.  X,  14.  Cf.  also  Sueton.,  De  clar.  rhet.  c.  S;  ;  "  Kecitantcs  ct 
benigne  et  patienter  (sc.  Augustus]  autiut  nee  tantum  cannina  et  hisioiias 
sed  et  orationes  et  dialotios." 

•"  Cf.  Ilainmer,  />>;//-.  :n  dm  \cy  gross,  quintil.  I)c\L,  })i).  5.  jS  sq. 

^-'Cf.  Sueton.,  l'es/>.  c.  iS  :  "Frunus  c  nsco  Latinis  (iiaeciscjuc  rheto- 
ribus  annua  centena  constituit."  Hul^ebos,  /)^  ,duc.  ft  :nsf.  a/ud  Kcm., 
pp.  lOl  sq. 

•'•■'Cf.  Friedlander,  I\irstcdlung  dcr  Lit:cr.itu) ^cs.'.iJitc  Koms  iii,  p.  3  4; 
Rohde,  Der  griech.  Roman,  p.  291. 

^■'Cf.  Rohde,  /.  c.\    Ilainmer,  I^atr.  zu  doi  \')  gr.  .juit:t.  Dccl.,  j).  29. 
'^'Cf.  Dio  Cassius,  Ixxi,  i,  2. 


/ 


\ 


!       1 


THE   THEMES    TREATED    BY   THE    ELDER    SENECA.  17 

teachers  of  rhetoric.^«  From  the  middle  of  the  first  century  A.  D. 
the  African  schools  also  assumed  importance;'"  so  much  so  that 
by  the  time  of  Juvenal  the  best  advice  which  that  writer  would 
give  to  a  rhetor  desirous  of  makin-  his  fortune  was  that  he 
should  00  to  Africa.-  Thence  in  the  time  of  Hadrian  came 
Trunto  ol  Cirta,  '  who  had  so  lonor  and  so  triumphant  a  career  at 
Rome  as  pleader  and  rhetor:  "Orator,  consul,  teacher  of  two 
emperors,"  as  an  inscription  declares.'" 

2.    Their  method  of  insimctioji. 

The  preparation  of  the  pupil  for  the  rhetorical  school  w^as  the 
task  ot  the  -ranimarian,  whose  duty  it  was  to  drill  him   in  the 
forms  and  syntax  and  to  initiate  him  to  a  certain  extent  into  the 
national   literature.     The   orammarian,  however,   often   was   not 
content  with  this  important  but  humble  task  and  trespassed  on 
the  field  of  the  rhetorician."     As  a  consequence  the  pupil  came 
from    the  .grammarian   to   the   rhetorician  poorly  trained  in  the 
elements  of  lan^^ruaj^e  and   literature.     In   the    rhetorical  school 
itselfthe  training  was  a  gradual  progression  from   easy  exercises 
to  more  difficult.*''^     It  began  with  the  composition  of  narratives 
and  essays  on  oiven  themes  and  subjects  from  mythology,  epi- 
deictic  speeches  and  commonplaces,  as  on  vice,  virtue,  folly,' etc., 
monologues  of  historical  or  mythical  persons  reciting  the  reasons 
for  and  against  decision  {suasoriae).     As  the  last  and  most  diffi- 
cult  stage  of  the  exercises,  use  was  made  of  fictitious  judicial  cases 
in  which  the  pupils  took  the  parts  of  plaintiff,  defendant  or  advo- 
cate [controversiae).     Obviously  also  the  delivery  and  the  trainmg 
of  the  memory  were  not  neglected.     But  as  Quintilian  complains 
about  the  grammarians,  so  does  he  likewise  about  the  rhetors 
that  they  considered  it  beneath  their  dignity  to  trouble  themselves 
much  about  the  elementary  exercises  of  their  art  and  were  too 


56 


Cf.  Friedlander,  Darst.  der  Litt.  Roms  iii,  p.  394;  Rohde,  Der  gr. 
Roman,  p.  301.  On  the  prominence  of  the  schools  of  Gaul  cf.  Hainmer, 
J^eitr.  zu  den  ujgr.  ,/iant.  Dec!.,  pp.  29  sq.;   Morawski,  De  rhet.  Lat  ,  p.  i.  ' 

•''  Cf.  Monceaux,  Lcs  AfruaniSy  pp.  5S  sq. 

^Cf.  Sat.  vii,  147-9. 

Cf.  Monceaux,  Les  Africains,  pp.  211,  sq.;   Simcox,  Lat.  Lit.,  p.  243. 
Cf.  Orelli,  Inscr.  Lat.  11,  76. 
^'  Cf.  Quintilian,  Lnst.  Orat.  ii,  i ,  i  sq. ;  "  Rhetores  utique  nostri  suas  partes 
omiserunt  et  grammatici  alienas  occupaverunt." 
'^^  Quint il.,  ibid.  I.  9. 


5',* 
«0 


1 

\ 


i8 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  CV  iUL  ELDER  SENECA. 


fond  of  hurrying  their  pupils  into  the  more  acl\ancecl  stage  of 
declamations.'^'  As  regards  their  manner  ot  imparting  instruction 
in  the  rhetorical  art,  some  masters  did  all  the  talking  themselves, 
i.  e.  they  declaimed  and  the  students  mert^ly  listened  ;  others 
began  with  a  recitation  which  was  followed  by  a  discussion 
between  teacher  and  students  ;  while  still  otlu-rs  allowed  the 
pupils  to  declaim.'  The  dec  I  am  at  i  on  ts  [coiityovcr.^iac  and  siiaso- 
riae)  of  the  rhetoricians  of  the  imperial  period  havt-  become  pro- 
verbial for  speech  marked  by  at'tectation.  insincerity,  hollow 
pathos,  fancifulness,  inanity  of  thought  and  similar  characteristics. 
They  did  not  make  their  appearance  endowed  with  these  {|uali!ies 
all  at  once.  They  h.ive  quite  a  long  history,  and  that  history 
confirms  the  statement  previously  made  that  it  seems  to  be 
inherent  in  the  nature  ot  artistic  speech  to  go  astray  again  and 
again  from  the  path  of  naturalness  and  truthfulness. 

The  introduction  of  recitations  on  tictitious  themes  as  an  exer- 
cise in  oratory  is  ascribed  either  to  Demetrius  Phalereus,"  or 
to  Aeschines  while  living  in   exile  at    Rhodes."      Hut   it  may  be 

^'^  Ibid.  I,  2:  *' Nam  et  illi  declamare  modo  et  sciciUiam  dtH-lamaiuli  ac 
facultatem  tradere  officii  sui  ducunt." 

*^' Cf.  Seneca,  6't';;//c'r'.  ix,  2,  23:  "  Xeque  enini  illi  (>i\  I.atroni')  nios  erat 
quemquam  audire  declamanteni  ;  dcclansabat  ipse  taiituiu  ei  aicbat  se  non 
esse  magistrum,  sed  exeniplum  ;  nee  uHi  alii  contigissc  scio  cjuam  a{)ud 
Graecos  Niceti,  apud  Romanos  Lalroni,  ut  discipuli  noi^  audiri  desidera- 
rent,  sed  contenti  essent  audire  " :  cf.  al>o  Koerher,  l'i!t>  dm  Khitor  Sen., 
pp.  30  sq.;  Friedlander,  iKirst.  drr  L:ff.  Kotfis  lii,  pj).  3SS-<)0  ;  Moniiii^en,  /'  m. 
Gesch.  ii,  p.  427  ;  Ilainmer,  Ihitr.  zu  Jcu  19  f^^r.  .juuH.  IK\l.,  p.  6  ;  Rohde, 
Di'r  i^riech.  Roman,  pp.  295  sq. 

^''Cf.  Quintilian,  lns.\  (drat,  ii,  4,  41  :  "  Xam  fictas  ad  imitationem  fori 
♦onsiliorumque  materias  apud  Graecos  dicere  circa  Deinctriuni  Phalereuni 
instituturu  fere  constat.  An  ah  ipso  itl  genus  exercitationis  Mt  inventuni, 
ut  alio  quoque  libro  sum  confessus,  paruni  coniperi  ;  ^^ed  ne  hi  quidem 
qui  hoc  fortissime  affirmant,  ullo  satis  idoneo  auctore  nituntur." 

^^  Philostratus  who  flourised  in  tlie  first  half  of  the  third  century  A.  1). 
in  his  Vitae  Sophistaruni  i,  1.  iS  (ed.  Kavser),  makes  Aeschines,  tiie  founder 
of  a  Second  Sophistic  winch  invented  the  standard  characters  of  the  decla- 
mations,— the  rich,  the  poor,  tlie  brave,  the  tyrant,  (sc.  //  (5fiT£/)a  acxfuaTiKTj) 
Tovg  nevTjraq  vTveTinrcjraTO  Kai  rovg  TT/ovaiovg  mi  rov^  apiarovg  Kal  Tovg  rvpdin>ovg  Kal 
rag  e'lg  ovofia  vTro^eaeig^  f(i>'  df  ;/  laTOf)in  ayei  rjp^e  6e  r^f  fxev  'apxniorepag  Topytag  6 
AeoDTlvor  h'  OerraAoif,  rr/f  de  devrepag  Alox'^v/j^  6  ' Arpofif/Tov^  rijv  fiev  'Ai^r'/vr/ai 
Tzo^.LTLKUiv  Ik-eooiv  Kapio.  df:  Evofxi'/J/aag  Kal  'VoAu)  Kal  fxeTex^ipKf^vTo  Tag  awnx'^ioeig 
o'l  uh'  a-n  A'lnxi-vov  Kara  rix^'W  ^*  ^^  ^^^  Topylov  Kara  to  do^av  ;  cf.  also  <^uintil., 
Instit.  Orat.  xii,  10,  19:  "Aeschines  enim,  cpii  hunc  (sc.  Rhodum)  exilio 
delegerat  locum,  intulit  eo  studia  Athenarum  ..." 


1^ 


f 


1' 


/ 


\ 


V 


>■ 


THE    THEMES    TRI:ati:1)    I;V    TIIF,    ELDER    SENECA 


19 


truthtully  said   that  ever  since  eloquence  was  treated  as  an  art, 
some   kind   of  exercises    has   been  practised  in  connection  with 
It.     Protagoras   caused  his  pupils    to  learn    by    heart    examples 
ot  such   eloquence  as  were  most  frequently  used.     Aristotle  in 
Cicero's   Bnitus  mentions  these  commonplaces  as  having  been 
composed  in  writing.'^     In  a  similar  manner  Gorgias  taught  his 
pupils  by  models,  especially  such  as  either  exalted  or  depreciated 
things.-     In  fact,  all  orators  in   all   times   have  been  obliged  to 
tram  themselves  for  appearance  in  public  by  some  sortofexerci.se 
in  declaiming,  only  they  have  made  a  practice  of  declaiming  on 
the  same  themes  on  which  they  were  afterward  to  speak  or  write, 
while  the  ;/£/.c'r'/.'  which  arose  at  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  B.  C 
were  on  fictitious  subjects  with  characters  which  became  stereo- 
typed.    The  Peripatetic  and  Academic  schools  had  exercises  in 
^iai-z  and  loci  cormjiunes  of  different  kinds/'     The  !iilzr<u  were 
specially  favored  and  brought  into  vogue  by  the  Asian  rhetors, 
who   disdained   all   theoretical   preparation  and   all    method  and 
system  in  the  exercise  of  the  art  of  oratory,  caring  only  to  acquire 
and  practise  it  as  a  knack  ;  ^"  so  that  the  immediate  origin  of  the 
declamations   in   the  imperial  period  is  to  be  found  among  the 
Asians.  '  We  have  an  interesting  notice  in  Seneca  v'  "  Declamabat 
autem   Cicero  non   quales  nunc  controversias  dicimus,   ne  tales 
quidem,  quales  ante  Ciceronem  dicebantur,  quas  thesis  vocabant. 

^"Cicero,  Brutus  xii,  46:  "  Itaque  ait  Aristoteles  .  .  .  scriptasque 
fuisse  ct  paratas  a  I'rotagora  verum  illustrium  disputationes.  quae  nunc 
coninuines  appellantur  b^i." 

'^  Ilnd.  47  :  "(Juod  idem  fecisse  Gorgiam,  cum  singularum  rerum  laudes 
vituperationesque  conscripsisset  ;  quod  iudicaret  hoc  oratoris  esse  maxime 
pro{Minm.  rem  augere  posse  laudando  vituperandoque  rursus  adfiigere"; 
cf.  al.M.  Aristotle,  Sophist.  Elench.  c.  34,  6.  36;  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orai.  iii,' 
I,  \2  sq.;    Blass,  Gesch.  der  aft.  h'ereds.  i,  p.  54. 

•'•'Cf.  (Quintilian,  Instit.  Orat.  xu,  2,  2^  :  "  Academiam  quidam  utilissi- 
mam  credunt,  quod  mos  in  utramque  partem  disserendi  ad  exercitationem 
forcnsium  causarum  proxime  accedat.  .  .  .  Peripatetici  studio  quoque  se 
quodam  oratorio  iactant.  Nam  theses  dicere  exercitationis  gratia  fere  est 
ab  iis  institutum";  Cicero,  Orator  xiv,  46:  -  Haec  igitur  quaestio  a  pro- 
priis  personis  et  temporibus  ad  universi  generis  orationem  traducta  appel- 
lator ^y.'n,r.  In  hac  Aristoteles  adolescentes  non  ad  philosophorum  morem 
tenuiter  disserendi,  sed  ad  copiam  rhetorum  in  utramque  partem,  ut  orna- 
tius  et  uberius  dici  possit,  exercuit." 

•"Cf.  Hlass,  Die  ^riech.  Brrcds.,  pp.  55  sq. 

■^'Cf.  Hlass,  /.  r.,  p.  60;  Jebb,  Ihe  Attic  Orators  ii,  p.  447. 

'■■  J'} acf.  Contr.  i,  12. 


20 


THE    THI^MES    TKF ATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


/ 


Hoc  enim  oenu?;  materlae,  quo  nos  exercemur,  adeo  novum  est, 
ut  nomen  qiioque  eius  novum  sit.  Controxersias  nos  dicimus: 
Cicero  causas  vocabat.  Hoc  vero  alterum  nomen  (iraecum 
quidem,  sed  in  Latinum  ita  translatum,  ut  pro  Latino  sit,  sclio- 
lastica,  controversia  multo  recentius  est,  sicut  ipsa  'declamatio' 
apud  nullum  antiquum  auctorem  ante  Ciceronem  et  Calvum 
inveniri  potest,  qui  declamationem  a  dictione  distinjL^uit  ;  ait  enim 
declamare  iam  se  non  mediocriter,  dicere  bene,  alterum  putat 
domesticae  exercitationis  esse,  alterum  verae  actionis.  Modo 
nomen  hoc  prodiit  ;  nam  et  studium  ipsum  nuper  celebrari 
coepit."  This  passa<T^e  will  l)e  referred  to  more  lully  later,  but 
here  the  tollovvino  conclusions  mav  be  drawn  from  it  :  Before 
Cicero's  time  not  only  pupils  in  the  schools  declaimed  but  also 
public  orators,  at  their  homes  however,  as  an  exercise  and  prep- 
aration for  their  appearance  in  public  ;  at  the  time  of  Cicero  and 
Calvus  ''declamare"  became  a  special  term  tor  a  kind  of  recitation 
distinouislied  from  the  delivery  of  a  speech,  "  dictio.  direre,"  while 
the  "  controversia,"  the  equivalent  ot  the  Greek  " 'V/or-/'  tormed 
the  latest  phase  of  declaiming.'"  We  may  add  that  the  writing 
of  compositions  was  recommended  as  the  most  efiective  means  of 
obtaining  a  good  style, '^  and  also  the  paraphrasing  of  both  prose 
and  poetry,'"  as  well  as  translation  from  Greek  into  Latin."" 

" '  Cf.  Bonnell,  De  ?nut.  suh  prim.  Caes.  F.Ioti.,  pp.  i6  sq.  Bonnell  remarks 
that  the  word  "declamare"  does  not  occur  before  Cicero.  Its  siriijile  and 
original  meaning  was  "  clamando  vcl  vehementer  dicendo  aliquid  prodcre." 
Cf.  Cicero,  Verr.  iv,  66  :  "  Ille  autem  insanus,  qui  pro  isto  vehementissime 
contra  me  declamasset."  Even  after  the  word  had  been  adopted  to  express 
exercise  in  oratory,  "  declamatio  "  in  ('icero's  time  was  used  for  the  action 
of  declaiming,  "  declamandi  actio"  and  only  later  came  to  signify  a  work 
*'  opus,"  as  opposed  to  an  oration  delivered  in  court. 

"'•'Cf.  Cicero,  De  or  at.  i,  33,  150  :  Caput  autem  est  .  .  .  quam  plurlmum 
scribere. 

'^Cf.  Cicero,  ibid.  154  :  "...  solitum  esse  uti  sciebam  (sc.  C.  Carbonem), 
ut  aut  versibus  propositis  quam  maxime  gravil)us  aut  oratione  aliqua  lecta 
ad  eum  finem,  quern  memoria  possem  C(^mprehendere,  cam  rem  ipsam,quam 
legissem,  verbis  aliis  maxime  possem  lectis  pronuntiarem." 

'•"Cf.  Cicero,  ibid.  155:  "  Postea  mihi  placuit,  eoque  sum  usus  adules- 
cens,  ut  summorum  oratorum  (iraecas  orationes  explicarem.  (\)uibus  lectis 
hoc  adsequebar,  ut,  cum  ea,  quae  legeram  Graece,  Latine  redderem,  non 
solum  optimis  verbis  uterer  et  tamei\  usitatis,  sed  etiam  expiimerem  quae- 
dam  verba  imitando,  quae  nova  nostris  essent,  dum  modo  essent  idonea"; 
cf.  also  Quintil.,  Inst.  Orat.  x,  5,  2  sq.:  Vertere  Graeca  in  Latinum  veteres 
nostri  oratores  optimum  iudicabant. 


>    '    f 


/ 


\ 


V 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SEXECV 


21 


a.  Various  kinds  of  dcclamatiojis  in  the  ifuperial  period. — As 
the  methods  ot  teaching  varied  so  also  did  the  exercises  em- 
ployed.'' The  passage  quoted  from  Seneca'^  gives  the  key  to 
then-  division.  He  says  :  "  Declamabat  autem  Cicero  non  quales 
nunc  controversias  dicimus,  ne  tales  quidem,  quales  ante  Cice- 
ronem   dicebantur,    quas    thesis   vocabant Controversias   nos 

dicimus:  Cicero  causas  vocabat."  It  would  thus  seem  that  we 
should  distinguish  three  periods  of  the  declamation:  i.  In  the 
tmie  previous  to  Cicero  there  were  declamations  on  'V/<r.':.  The 
term  was  introduced  into  rhetoric  by  Hermagoras,  who  divided 
the  entire  material  of  the  speaker  into  ^>in:z  and  NrJ//£^.'c,  which 
Cicero  renders  by  "  quaestio  "  and  "causa"  respectively.  The 
difference  between  them  is  that  the  ^>i<7iz  is  the  discussion  of  a  case 
in  a  general,  indefinite  manner,  without  attaching  it  to  definite  per- 
sons and  circumstances,  while  the  o-J»V;^r:  on  the  other  hand  has 
them,  so  that  it  becomes  more  special,  individual,  and  concrete." 

"Ct.  .Suetonius,  Df  clar.  ?-/iet.  c.   I  :    "Ratio  dicendi   nee  una   omnibus." 

'^  Fjafj .   Contr.   i,   12. 

'■'Cf.  Cicero,  J)i  iiivcntionc  i,  6,  8:  "Nam  Hermagoras  quidem  nee  quid 
dicat  atteudere  nee  quid  policeatur  intelligere   videtur,  qui   oratoris  mate- 
riam    in    causam   et   quaestionem   dividat.      Causam   esse    dicat   rem,   quae 
habebat  in  se  controvt-rsiam  in  dicendo  positam  cum   personarum  cettarum 
inteiposiiione  ;   quam  nos  quoque    oratori    dicimus  attributam  .  .  .      Quaes- 
tionem autem  appellet,   quae   habeat  in   se  controversiam  in  dicendo  posi- 
tam sine  certarum  personarum  interpositione  ad   hunc  modum  :   Ecquid  sit 
bonum   praeter   honestatem  ?   verine  sint    gensus  .^    quae  sit  mundi  forma? 
quae    sit    solis   magnitudo.?"      Cf.   Thiele,  iy.v-w<7i'7?;77j,  pp.  30  sq.     Thiele 
says   that    Hermagoras    understood   by  ruatr  any  :/,-;//ia  {— -poS/Jifjia)  of  a 
general     nature.     "He    recommended    to    the    orator    to    speak    not    only 
<jn    definite    judicial    cases  or   on   definite  questions  of  internal   or   exter- 
nal   politics,    but    also    on  themes    which   were    not  of   a   political    nature 
and   on    abstract   questions,   so  that  one   might  be  a  pi/Tup,  and  a   anoiori/g 
at  once.     By  this,  rhetoric  seemed  to  acknowledge  a  desire  to  make   itself 
mistress  of  the  highest  and  most  important  problems  which  philosophy  had 
put  forward."      Hence  the  criticism  of   Cicero,  cf.  De  orat.   i,3i,38;   ii,  10, 
41  sq.;    19,  78  ;  31,  133  ;  iii,2S,  109.     6>;7z/t7;-  xiv,  46  previously  quoted.     Cf. 
also   Quintil.,    Inst.  Orat.  iii,    5,   5  sq.  :    "Item   convenit   quaestiones  esse 
aut  infinitas  aut  finitas.   Infinitae  sunt,  quae  remofis  personis  ettemporibus 
ei  locis  ceterisque  similibus   in   utramque   partem  tractantur,  quod   Graeci 
•^''T/i    dicunt,  Cicero  propositum,  ....  alii   quaestiones    philosopho  conve- 
nientes,  .  .  .      Finitae  autem  sunt  ex   complexu    rerum,    personarum,  tem- 
porum,  ceterorumque  ;  quae  i-^nhai,;  aGraccis  dicuntur,  causae  anostris.    In 
his  omnis  quaestio  videtur  circa  res  personasque  consistere."     The  render- 


32 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


The  '^^/'T.'T  then  embraced  themes  on  anything  and  e\n  vtliino^,  and 
to  the  same  catei>orv  of  themes  of  a  i^eneral  and  indt-hnitt^  nature 
beloni^  also  thr  loci  coinfjiunes.''^  which  were  nuich  in  lci\n»r  at 
Rome  in  tht-  earlv  period  on  acc()unt  ot  thrir  simplicity." 

2.  Al)0ut  the  time  (^f  Cicero  arose  the  'j-zo'^em;  (causae^,  /.  <^.,as 
Stated  in  note  79,  exercises  on  s[)ecialized  casts,  with  the  intro- 
duction of  definite  persons  and  circumstances;  they  were  tormed 
from  real  life,  either  in  its  daily  routine  in  the  courts,  or  taken  from 
history  which  included  also  mytholoi^y."'  The  r^/z^w/d'  .ilso  included 
such  exercises  as  were  known  later  by  the  name  of  su(isnr/(U\  for 
which  history  and  mythology  oft'ered  am{)le  material/ 

3.  In  the  im{)erial  period,  althouj^h  they  may  not  ha\-e  been 
entirely  unknow^n  before  Au^^ustus."'  there  came  into  vo;^uedecla- 
mations  on  entirely  fictitious  themes  taken  from  the  realm  o!  the 
imagination;  of  these  we  have  s{:)ecimens  in  the  Controversiae  of 
Seneca  and  the  declamations  which  hear  the  name  oi  Quin- 
tilian." 

ing  "  proposituni  "  for  \9fo^c  is  used  by  Cicero  in  7>//. ;?  .m  ,  79:  Depart. 
orat.  1,4:  "  consultatio  "  ;  18,  Ci  :  "  propositum  "  again,;  both  combined 
\n  De  oral,  iii,  28,  109:  "  quasi  propositaci)nsvritati(i."  Of  the  definitions 
of  the  Greek  rhetoricians  ;  that  of  Theo  in  his  ~fH)yvfii>daii<!-'i  (Spengel,  I\het. 
Griiici  ii,  120)  seems  to  contain  essentially  the  words  of  Hermagoras  him- 
self (cf.  Thiele,  Hermagoras,  p.  28):  "  t^fff/f  larXv  kTTKjKTfTJii^  h))iKrj  (iu6ic- 
^Tirrjaiv  t'V(h\n^isvTj  avev  TzponuTzuv  upinfievuv  Kal  Tzdotj^  nepiardoeu^.  As  an  illus- 
tration Theo  gives  (Spengel  ii,  61)  :  nhv -diatg  fxev  eI  npoaijKEL  TToTiiopKovfilvntg 
aTparevfin  TrefXTzeiv  e'l^  tt/v  vnepopiav^  vTrodefJig  ^e  el  'Ax^r/i'aioig  Trpntji/KEL  Tro/.iopKov- 
uEvoiq  vrru  TlE?n-:Tovv7/aio)v  f/f  2f/ceA/av  arpaTevna  nhnreiv  ";  cf  Alexander  (Spen- 
gel iii,  i);  llerniogenes  7rpo}'}'//v.  (Spengel  u  17).  For  tiie  distint  lion 
between  '"quaestiones  cognitionis"  ( theoretical)  and  "cjuae^tiones  actionis" 
(practical)  cf.  Cicero,  De  orat.  iii,  :9,  iii  sq,  ;  7'o/>ica  21,  Si,  and  i'icierit's 
Introduction  to  Cicero,  /)e  orat.  ii,  'i  2. 

^Cf.  <Jaintil.  /fist.  Orat.  ii,  4,  22  sq.,  27-40  ;  Cicero,  Di  orat.  iii,  28,  109. 

^'  Cf.  blass.  Die griech.  Bereds.y  p.   110. 

^'Cf.  Cicero,  De  orat.  i,  ;^^,  149  ;  •■  I^quidem  probo  ista,  Crassus  inquit, 
quae  vo>  f  u  ere  soletis,  ut,  causa  aliqua  posita  consimili  cau^ai  am  earum, 
quae  in  forum  deferuntur,  dicatis  quam  niaxime  ad  vcntattm  accommo- 
date"; Suetonius,  De  clar.  rhet.  c.  i  ;  Cicero,  De  inventiotfe  i,  49,  92; 
cf.  also  Friedlander,  Darstellmig  der  Litt.  Rom  iii,  p.  388. 

^3Cf.  Blass,  Die gr.  Bereds.,  p.  iii. 

^  Ibid.,  p.  108. 

^^Cf.  Bonnell,  De  mut.  sub  prim.  Caes.  eloq.,  p,  17.  Honnell  observes  that 
the  word  *'  suasoria  "  does  not  occur  at  all  in  Cicero,  while  "  controversia  " 
occurs  only  with  the  meaning  of  dispute  or  quarrel,  strife  ('*scd  rixam  et 
pugnam  significans  "). 


> 


THE   THEMES    TREATED   BY   THE   ELDER   SENECA. 


23 


X      \ 


} 


b.  Characicr  of  iJic  declamaiions  of  the  imperial  period. — It  is 
well  known  that  the  chief  characteristics  of  the  declamations  in 
voi^ue  durinij  the  imperial  period  were  that  they  were  not  practi- 
cal, that  they  io;nored  real  life,  disre,^arded  truth,  and  indulged  in 
the  paradoxical  and  absurd.  "  The  rhetorical  school,"  says 
F^riedlander,'"  ''created  for  itself  in  the  course  of  time  its  own  fan- 
tastic world,  which  was  separated  from  life  by  a  wide  chasm  over 
which  no  bridu:e  was  leading."  This  rhetorical  departure  was 
not  an  absolutely  new  one.  As  remarked  above,  artistic  speech 
seems  to  have  always  had  a  tendency  to  deviate  from  verity  and 
natur.ilness.  Examples  may  be  found  earlier  than  Asianism. 
Thus  Corax  of  Syracuse,  who  lived  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth 
century  B.  C,  is  alleged  to  have  defined  rhetoric  as  -ziHouq 
ny^'utf(oyn-^  aud  his  disciple  and  successor  Tisias,  the  first  to  write 
on  the  technique  of  rhetoric,''  teaches  in  regard  to  the  finding  of 
arguments  that  the  orator  is  not  to  concern  himself  about  the 
truth  but  to  be  content  with  the  ir/.uz,  to  make  anything  appear 
probable  or  improbable  just  as  it  suits  his  interest.**^  Protagoras 
promised  to  teach  r''/>  i\rzui  /.ayir,  /.outzm  -mzl^.^'^  The  "  ^i^x^'^i  "  of 
Anaximenes  was  openly  proclaimed  to  have  no  other  object  than 
to  furnish  any  one  who  followed  it,  be  he  right  or  wrong,  with  the 
means  to  defeat  his  adversary  even  if  the  latter  were  indisputably 
in  the  right,  and  to  deceive  the  judge.'"  "Many  a  celebrated 
oration  of  antiquity,"  says  Spengel,"'^  "is  nothing  else  than  an 
incontestable  proof  that  external  splendor  and  brilliancy  con- 
cealed the  truth  by  the  appearance  of  truth."  The  Tetralogies 
of  Antiphon  (orations  xiii-xv)  exhibit  in  their  arguments  much 
sophistical  casuistry  and  chicanery.     We  find  oratory  constantly 

^ Darstt-ilu?!.:  der  Lilt.  Kotns  iii,  p.  391. 

^''Cf.  Cicero,  De  inventione  ii,  6:  "Ac  veteres  quidem  scriptores  artis 
usque  a  principe  illo  atque  inventore  Tisia  .  .  .  ";  Plato,  Phaedr.  267a 
273-'  f.;  An^t..  Ruet.  ii,  24  (S5)engel,  Khet.  gr.  i,  116  sq.).  The  work  is 
referred  to  as  that  of  Corax. 

"^Cf.  Aristotle,  Rhet.  ii,  24  (Spengel,  Rhet.  Cr.  i,  167):  '' (paiverai  fiev  ovv 
afjLipoTepa  eiKot'-a,  iari  <)€  to  fXEv  Eimq  to  (^e  nvy  oTr/wf,  a/lX'  (ocKEp  EipTjTat.^^  He 
illustrates  by  an  example  ;  cf.  also  Spengel,  Deber  das  Studium,  etc.,  p.  8. 

^Cf.  Plato,  Phaedr.  267a;  Kx\s\..,  Rhet.  ii,  24  (Spengel,  Rhet.  Gr.  i,  167); 
Aristophanes,  Clouds,  112-15;  Gellius,  Aoct.  Att.  \,  t,,  -j  ;  Diogenes  Laer- 
tius,  9,  32  ;   Socrates  also  was  charged  with  this,  cf.  Plato,  Apology  19b. 

^Cf.  Spengel,  Ueber  das  Studium,  etc.,  p.  9. 

*^  Ibid.  p.  14,  cf.  the  numerous  examples  in  illustration  of  this  observa- 
tion, pp.  14-16. 


24 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY   THE   ELDER   SENECA. 


applying  itself  to  futile  discussions  and  absurd  and  perverse  para- 
doxes. Pericles  is  said  to  have  engaged  in  discussion  with  Prota- 
goras an  entire  day  on  the  following  case :  A  Pentathlete  in  the 
races  inadvertently  killed  with  his  spear  the  Thessalian  Spitinos ; 
the  question  was,  who  was  the  author  of  the  accident :  The  Pen- 
tathlete because  he  hurled  the  spear,  or  those  in  charge  of  the 
race  because  they  arranged  it  in  such  a  manner,  or  finally  the 
spear  itself  because  it  passed  in  such  a  way  as  to  hit  the  unfortu- 
nate Spitinos.'^  Isocrates  complains  of  those  composers  of 
epideictic  speeches  who  selected  the  most  paradoxical  topics 
for  their  subjects.^^  Thus  Polycrates  (born  before  436  B.  C.) 
composed  speeches  in  defence  of  Busiris  and  in  accusation  of 
Socrates,'*  eulogies  on  Clytaemnestra,"  on  mice,"  pots,  and  voting 
pebbles."  Others  praised  the  lot  of  beggars  and  exiles,"  made  a 
hero  of  Paris,*"  or  selected  salt  and  drinking-vessels  as  objects  of 
encomium.^""  Among  the  Romans  we  find  traces  of  these  exer- 
cises in  Cornificius  and  Cicero.^"^  With  the  rhetoricians  of  the 
imperial  epoch  such  exercises  became  the  rule  and  what  is  of 
more  importance  still,  not  exercises  as  a  means  preparatory  to 
cases  in  real  life,  which  was  their  import  even  w  t!i  \hv  Asian 
orators,  but  they  came  to  be  regarded  as  an  end  in  themselves.^"- 
As  such  they  attained  an  extraordinary  importance.  I.ife  in  iha 
forum  antl  in  the  courts  was  considered  as  a  trade,  to  which  were 
attached  <ill  the  evils  of  greed  and  ambition  ;  the  dechiinatiuiih  uii 
the  otiier  hand  were  considered  as  purely  scientific  and  pminntinq; 
the  cuhivation  iifthe  mind.     Plinv^*^^  says  of  Isaeus.  hi>  coiitempo- 

^  Cf.  Plutarch,  Fn-uhs  c.  35. 

"^  'E/*ii^/;  ( 1  o  i  I  t . :  '*  ttai  rivet;  ol  fiiya  (pfjovovmvy  i/v  vKddeaiv  cltottov  Kal  -rrapado^uv 
TTOnjadjuevoi  irepi  ravrijc  dvEKTug  e'lKeiv  (^WT/i^tjai  k.  t.  ^..";  Borf.  (us  41)  ;  cf. 
Spengel,  [\-nc-r  di!s  S'uj:in>.'^  etc.,  i).  17.  An  example  of  this  fictitious  ora- 
torv  l)y  Lysias  is  given  111  I'lato's  Phaedr.  231  A-zji  C. 

^■*  Cf .  Isocrates,  I>"";.  (11),  4  sq. 

'-^  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  ii,  17.  4. 

^''Aristotle,  Riu't.  ii,  24  (Spenge!,  Rhct.  Graec.  i,  165). 

"'  Cf.  Alexander  Rhetor,  Spengel  iii,  3. 

^*  Cf.  Isocrates 'K/j-'iV/  (10),  8. 

^•*Cf.  Aristotle,  Rhet.  ii,  24  (Spengel,  A'- 

i<^Cf.  Plato,  Svmp.   177b. 

•^"  Cf.    Cicero,    Dc    invent,   ii,    40,    118: 
habeto  ;   si  habuerit  publica  esto." 

^^■-'Cf.  Klass,  l)u-  -ru'C'i.  Bereds.^  pp.  60  sq. 

^^^■^  Epist.  li,  3. 


:c\'.  Graec.  i,  163). 
"  Mcretri.x    corunaiii    auream    ue 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


25 


( 


/    \ 


.'  ^v 


^     ) 


rary:  "Annum  sexagesimum  excessit  et  adhuc  scholasticus 
tantum  est;  quo  genere  hominum  nihil  aut  simplicius  aut  sincerius 
aut  melius;  nos  enim,  qui  in  foro  verisque  htibus  terimur,  multum 
malitiae  quamvis  nolimus  addiscimus,  schola  et  auditorium,  ut 
ficta  causa,  ita  res  inermis,  innoxia  est  nee  minus  felix  senibus 
praesertim."^"*  As  regards  the  subject-matter  of  the  coniroversiae 
of  Seneca  and  the  declamationes  of  the  pseudo-Quintilian,  all  the 
themes  are  taken  from  the  domain  of  jurisprudence.  This  seemed 
the  least  dangerous  ground  for  a  display  of  rhetorical  pyrotech- 
nics under  an  autocratic  rule.  There  was  the  additional  advan- 
tage that  these  subjects  allowed  a  great  variety  of  interpretation 
and  argument  and  afforded  opportunity  for  a  display  of  rhetorical 
^j.j  105  gy^  aside  from  the  judicial  formula  to  which  the  treatise  is 
attached  all  is  imaginary. ^''^  Many  of  the  cases  on  which  the  judi- 
cial discussions  are  based,  those  for  instance  bearing  on  tyrants 
and  tyrannicide,^"'  have  no  application  to  Roman  life,  and  most  of 
them  are  unnatural,  extravagant,  absurd  and  not  infrequently 
indecent.     Of  the  74  themes  in  Seneca's  Controversiae,  19  have  to 

*^Cf.  Spengel,  Gelehrte  Anzeigen  der  bayrischen  Akademie  der  Wisseti' 
schaften  xlvii  (1858),  pp.  10  sq. 

'"•'  rf.  I.atro  in  Seneca,  Controv,  ix,  4,  9  :  *'  In  lege  .  .  .  nihil  excipitur,  sed 
multa,  quamvis  non  excipiantur,  intelleguntur  et  scriptuni  legis  angustum, 
interpretatio  diffusa  est";  cf  also  Koerber,  Ueber  den  K/utor  Seneca^  p.  37. 

'^Cf.  some  of  the  themes  :  Seneca,  Conir.  i,  i  :  Liberi  parentes  alant 
aut  vinciantur ;  i,  2  :  Sacerdos  casta  ex  castis,  pura  e  puris  sit.;  i,  5; 
Raj)!, I  rai^tnris  aut  mortem  aut  indotas  nuptias  optet  ;  (^uintilian,  Dcclavi. 
ccxhv  :  C*^ii  ck])osituni  infitiatus  fuerit,  cjuadrupluni  solvat,  etc.  Petro- 
nius.  Sat.  i  (directed  against  the  rhetoricians)  11.  10  sqcj.  enumerates  some  of 
the  subjects  treated  in  the  rhetorical  .^^chools  :  "  Piratas  cum  catenis  in 
litore  stantcs  ;  tvrannos  edicta  scribentes,  quibus  imperent  filiis,  ut  patrum 
suonun  ca[>ita  praecidant  ;  responsa  in  pestilentiani  data,  ut  virgines  tres 
ant  ]'!  ui  cs  inimolent  ur  "  ;  Tacitus,  yj/<//.  c.  35:  "  vSic  fit,  ut  tyrannicidarum 
praeniia  aut  vitiataruni  elt-ctiones  aut  pestilentiae  remcdia  aut  incesta  mat- 
rum  aut  (juidqnici  in  schola  coticlie  agitur,  in  foro  vel  raro  vel  nunquam, 
ingcntibus  verbis  persequantur  "  ;  cf.  also  Juvenal,  Sat.  vii,  150  sq.  ;  Quin- 
tilian,  Instit.  Orat.  ii,  10,  3-5.  (^)uintilian  mentions  also  the  "  magos,*' 
which  must  have  been  a  later  additiori  to  the  repertoire  of  the  rhetoricians, 
for   in    Seneca   they   do    not    yet    occur  ;   cf.    Simcox,    Latiti   Literatiue^    pp. 

433  ^q-  (c.  viii). 

'""Cf.  Seneca,  Confr.  ii,  5.  iii,  6;  Quintilian,  Declam.  ccxliii,  cclxix, 
cclxxi,  etc.;   also  Seneca,  Contr.  v,  3:    Pater  pancratiastae. 


\ 


26 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  i'.V  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


27 


do  with  immoral  relations,'"^  7  with  tyrants,""  7  with  poison-i^^  or 
attempts  at  it.""  14  with  disinheriting  children  (abchcatio).'^* 
Others  are  no  less  nnnatural  and  perverse.  Fictitious,  even 
impossible,  relations  and  circumstances  are  presupposed  ;  the  par- 
ties are  placed  in  the  stronq^est  possible  conflicts  of  equalh-  sacred 
duties  and  strong  emotions  and  sympathies,  and  are  made  to  do 
or  order  to  be  done  the  most  monstrous  things.^'-  Manv  of  the 
cases  treated  in  the  Controversiae  and  Declamationes  were  proba- 
bly analogous  to  scandalous  occurrences  in  real  life  in  decadent 
Rome.  Compare  for  instances  Tacitus,  Ayinales  ii,  74;  iii,  i,  on 
the  poisoner  Matina  ;  iv,  i,  the  rumor  about  Seianus,  Tiberius,  and 
Drusus;  iv,  22,  on  the  murder  of  his  wife  by  Plautius  Sihanus  ;  xiv, 
44.^^"  But  in  general  it  mav  be  said  that  the  iheloricians  i)f  this 
period  turned  away  from  the  atilairs  of  real  lite  with  a  certain 
haughty  disgust.  "  De  magnis  maiora  loqui"'"'  seems  to  have 
been  their  motto,  and  to  them  the  equivalent  of  "  magna  "  was 
the  uncommon  and  the  bizarre."'  Such  fictitious  themes  on  cases 
frequently  of  a  revolting  and  abhorrent  nature,  rrcpiired  in  tiieir 
treatment  an  extraordinary  and  constant  straining  and  forcing  of 
ideas  and  language,  in  order  to  hold  the  attention  of  an  idle  and 
blase  audience  which  had  no  other  interest  than  di\ersion  and 
distraction.  The  fact  that  the  same  subjects  were  treated  bv  sev- 
eral rhetoricians,  spurred  them   to  <\(j  their  utmost  in  subtleties 


^o^^i,  2,  3,  4.  5,  7  ;  ii,  3,  4.  7  ;  '''.  5  ;  J^''  3-  7  ;  v.  6  ;  vi,  6.  8  ;  vii.  ^.  6,  8  ; 
viii,  6  ;   ix,  i. 

^•^^1,6;    i  i .  5  ;   i  i  i ,  6  ;   i  v ,  7  ;   v ,  8  ;   v  i  i ,  6  ;   i  x .  4 

i"^iii,  3,  8  ;   vi,  4,6  ;   vii,  3  ;   ix,  5,  6. 

'"  i,  1,8;  ii,  1 .  2,  4  ;  iii.  3,  4  ;  v.  2  ;  vi.  i  ;  vii,  i,  3.  "  It  is  rcniar l<al)!e," 
says  Yx'\^(\\'\x\(\t\,  Darst.  der  Litt.  Koms  iii,  p.  393,  "and  shows  most  clearly 
the  novellistic  character  of  these  inventi(jns,  that  the  collection  ot  v^entca 
had  been  frequently  and  with  evident  predilection  used  in  a  ci)lkctit»n  of 
novels  and  anecdotes  which  was  very  popular  in  the  Middle  Aiie>  as  an 
entertaining  book  "  (the  Gesta  Romanoruvi)  ;  in  De  Sen.  Contro:.  :>:  (it'st. 
Rom.  adhih.      Friedlander  gives  parallel  passages  from  both  works. 

"-Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  i,  i,  3,  4,  7  ;  vi,  2,  7  ;  vii,  7  ;  x,  3,  \  ;  Friedl.inder, 
Darstell.   dcr   Litt.  Kotns  iii,  pp.  392   sq.  ;   <^)aintilian.  Peel,  ccxxn,  ccxxiii. 

^'■•Cf.  Hainmer,  Hcttr.zu  den  kj  ^^ross.  quintil.  Decl.,  \>.  7. 

^"Cf.  Juvenal,  Sat.  iv,  17. 

^'^Cf.  C^'jir'ti^i^"'  Inst.  Orat.  viii, 3.71  in  protest:  "Naturam  intucamur, 
banc  sequamur.  Umnis  elociuentia  circa  opera  vitae  est,  ad  se  refert 
quisque  quae  audit,  et  id  facillime  accipiunt  animi,  quod  agnoscunt." 


•r 


I 


i 


/  '^ 


|i 


and  surprising  turns  of  thought  and  expression^^*^ — the  "  inopina- 
tum  "  at  any  cost — so  that  the  treatise  became  a  mosaic  of  in- 
volved dicieria}^'  Having  no  attainable  object,  nothing  to  stir 
the  heart  and  rouse  the  emotions,  the  rhetor  could  only  by  lorce 
of  imagination  enter  into  the  spirit  of  his  theme,  finding  all  the 
points  of  opportunity  it  afforded  for  displaying  the  elegance  ol  his 
style  and  his  skill  in  speaking  on  any  subject,  for  and  against, 
making  "  the  small  great  and  the  great  small. "^''  The  character- 
istics of  the  oratory  of  the  declamators  are  thus  compared  with 
the  oratory  of  the  courts  by  Cassius  Severus :  "Ego  tamen 
et  propriam  causam  videor  posse  reddere  ;  adsuevi  non  auditorem 
spectare,  sed  iudicem  ;  adsuevi  non  mihi  res})ondere,  sed  adver- 
sario  ;  non  minus  devito  supervacua  dicere  quam  contraria.  hi 
scholastica  quid  non  supervaciann  est  cum  ipsa  supervacua  sit? 
Indicabo  tibi  affectum  meum  :  cum  in  foro  dico,  aliquid  ago  ;  cum 
declamo,  id  quod  bellissime  Censorinus  aiebat  de  his,  qui  honores 
in  munici[)iis  ambitiose  peterent,  videor  mihi  in  sornniis  laborare. 
Deinde  res  ipsa  diversa  est:  totinn  aliud  est  pu guar  e,  aliiid  venti- 
lare.  Hoc  ita  semper  habitum  est,  scholam  quasi  ludum  esse, 
forum  arenam.""'     These  hothouse  orators  when  exposed  to  the 

"*  Besides  the  speaking  by  contemporaries  on  stock  subjects,  we  find 
that  the  same  themes  were  declaimed  upon  repeatedly,  cf.  Seneca,  Contr. 
ii.  3  with  Quintilian,  Ihui.  cccxiix  ;  Contr.  ii,  5  with  Vecl.  ccli  ;  Contr.  iii,  9 
witii  Ih',I.  ccclxxx  ;  Contr.  iv,  4  with  Decl.  ccclxx  ;  Contr.  vi,  5  with  Decl. 
ccc  ;  Contr.  vi,  6  with  Deol.  cccliv  ;  Co)itr.  ix,  6  with  Decl.  ccclxxxi  ;  Contr. 
X,  2  similar  to  Decl.  cclviii.  How  completely  this  artificiality  of  both  mat- 
ter and  form  became  identified  with  antique  rhetoric,  and  how  persistently 
it  held  its  own  may  be  noted  from  the  fact  that  the  Dictiones  of  Ennodius 
at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  A.  D.  are  still  busy  with  the  old  themes  of 
step-mothers,  tyrannicides,  etc.,  although  there  is  a  marked  decadence  in 
the  manner  of  their  treatment.     Cf.  Ennodius,  Diet,  xv  and  xviii. 

""Cf.  Seneca,  Praef.  Contr.  i,  21  :  Nihil  est  iniquius  his,  qui  nusquam 
putant  esse  subtilitatem,  nisi  ubi  nihil  est  praeter  suhtilitatem. 

""  Cf.  Plato,  J'haedr.  267  A.  Again  we  find  in  Ennodius's  Epistle  on 
Education  the  old  familiar  claim  that  rhetoric  is  the  crown  of  the  sciences, 
able  to  make  black  white  and  white  black  :  "  Post  apicem  divinitatis  ego 
ilia  sum,  quae  vel  commuto  si  sunt  facta  vel  facio.  ...  Si  noster  tantum, — 
non  siringunt  criniina  quemquam  Nos  vitae  maculas  tergimus  artis  ope  Si 
nives  constct  merito  quis  teste  senatu.  Cogimus  hunc  omnes  dicere  nocte 
satum."  A  sweeping  claim  indeed  for  the  "  pomposa  recitatio."  Cf. 
Ennodius,  Atnhrosio  ct  l^eato^  Opusc.  vi,  pp.  407,  408,  ed.  Hartel. 
_  "'M'f.  Seneca,  /'raef.  Contr.  iii,  12  sq.      See  also  Praef.  Contr.  ix,  2. 


I 


28 


Tin:    THEMES    TREATED    P.V    THE    ELDER    SEXECA. 


fresh  air  of  real  life,  were  entirely  out  of  their  element  and  became 
confused:  "Aoedum  istos  declamatores  produc  in  senatum.  in 
forum;  cum  loco  mutabuntur  ;  velut  adsueta  clauso  et  delicatae 
umbrae  corpora  sub  divo  stare  non  possunt,  non  imbi  em  ferre.  non 
solem  sciunt,  vix  se  inveniunt,  adsuerunt  enim  suo  arbitrio  ciiserti 
esse.  Non  est  quod  oratorem  in  hac  puerili  exercitatione  spectes. 
Quid  si  velis  gubernatorem  in  piscina  aestimare?  """  7^he  rht-tor 
Porcius  Latro  l)eintr  called  to  defend  a  relation,  became  so  con- 
fused under  the  open  sky  of  the  forum  that  at  his  request  the 
court  was  transferred  to  a  basilica.'-^  The  orij^inal  object  of  these 
exercises,  viz.  to  prepare  for  actual  life,  was  entirely  lost  sii^htol.'-^ 
The  whole  affair  was  a  piece  of  the.itrical  ostentation  to  amuse  the 
audience  and  satisfy  the  vanity  of  the  teacliers.'"'  Hence  the 
selection  of  subjects  fit  for  grandiloquence,'-'  for  the  inflated  vanity 
of  the  rhetoricians  was  one  of  the  roots  of  the  evil.  They  did  not 
care  for  the  truth  or  even  i^^ood  sense,  but  to  win  the  a{)plause  ot 
the  public.  Complaints  of  the  vociferous  clamors  of  the  schools 
are  numerous. '''  Still  in  fairness  it  should  be  added  that  not  all  the 
blame  was  laid  ui)on  the  rhetoricians  by  those  of  their  contempo- 
raries who  deplored  most  bitterly  the  corrupting  intluence  ol  this 

^'^ IHd.,  Praef.  Contr.  iii,  13  sq. 

'''  Ibid.,  Fraef.  Contr.  ix,  3  ;   ci'.  al>o  Quintilian,  h:s(.  {>>at.  x.  v  i'"^. 

'-'■-  Cf.  Seneca's  idea  of  an  exercise  as  he  describes  it.  Praef,  Cofifr.  ix,  4  : 
Non  est  autem  utilis  exercitatio,  nisi  quae  open  simillinia  e.-^t,  m  qiK^d 
exercet  ... 

'■■^•HJf.  Quintilian,  Itisttt.  Of\:t.  ii,  10,  S  sq  :  "Nam  si  foro  non  prat.i)atat  ; 
aut  scaenicae  ostentationi  aut  turiosae  vociferationi  simillimuni  est  .  .  .  "  ; 
cf.  also  vii,  2,  54  ;   x,  2,  12  ;   7,  21. 

'■-'•*  Cf.  Morawski,  IK^  rJiet.  /</.'.,  p.  <). 

'2^Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ix,  6,  12  :  "  Vx  aie^'at  Cestius  ;  quod  si  ad  deridcn- 
durn  me  dixit,  homo  venustus  fuit,  et  ei;o  nunc  scio  nie  nu-ptani  .-ententiani 
dicere  ;  multa  autem  dico  non  quia  mihi  placent,  sed  quia  audicntihus 
placitura  sunt."  As  to  the  applause  ct.  Contr.  ii,  i.  36;  vii,  4,  10;  ii,  3, 
19:  "Cum  scholasticorum  summo  fragore,"  the  absence  of  which  in  the 
forum  was  one  of  the  causes  of  the  discomfiture  of  the  rhetorician.s  wlien 
there;  cf.  Pracf.  Contr.  ix,  2;  "Cuni  ventuni  est  ad  forum  et  dcsiit  illos 
ad  omnem  gestum  plausus  excipere,  aut  deficiunt  aut  labant  "  ;  (Quintilian, 
Inst.  Orat.  ii,  2,  10  :  "  Ilia  vero  vitiosissinia  quae  iam  iiunianilas  vocatur, 
invicem  qualiacunque  laudandi,  cum  est  indecora  et  tht-utralis  et  severe 
institutis  scholis  aliena  .  .  .  "  ;  iv,  i,  77  ;  3,  i  ;  ix,  4,  02  ;  cf.  also  Seneca 
the  philosopher,  Epist.  54,  12.  From  the  schools  this  theatrical  mbsde- 
meanor  found  its  way  into  the  courts,  cf.  Pliny,  lipisi.  ii,  14  ;  .Moraw>ki,  De 
rhet.  Idt .,  p.  8,  foot  note. 


,  I 


( 


/ 


\ 


i 


/    vv 


'I 


TH 


Ill-.MI-S  TkKATF.D  BY  THE  ELDER  SEXECA. 


29 


kind  of  education.  It  was  demanded  by  the  superficial  tendency 
of  the  time,  and  the  rhetoricians  as  children  of  their  time  simply 
met  this  demand.  False  oratory  was  an  effect  more  than  a  cause: 
".  .  .  talis  hominibus  fuit  oratio  qualis  vita."  ^"'^  Petronius,  who 
attacked  the  rhetors  in  the  most  unsparing  manner,  says  :^^' 
"  Nihil  nimirum  in  his  exercitationibus  doctores  peccant,  qui 
necesse  habent  cum  insanientibus  furere.  .  .  .  Quid  ergo  est? 
parentes  obiurgatione  digni  sunt,  qui  volunt  liberos  suos  severa 
lege  proficere.  .  .  ."  Tacitus"'  says :  "  Quis  enim  ignorat  et 
eloquentiam  et  ceteras  artes  descivisse  ab  ilia  vetere  gloria  non 
inopia  hominum.  sed  desidia  iuventutis  et  negligentia  parentum 
et  inscientia  praecipientium  et  oblivione  moris  antiqui.' 


•    >'  129 


The  Controversiae. — The  form  and  division  of  the  Controversiae 
are  given  in  the  title  of  Seneca's  works  :  "  Oratorum  et  rhetorum 
sententiae,  divisiones,  colores." 

1.  The  Seniejiiiae,  like  the  inventio,  contain  the  material  neces- 
sary for  judging  the  case  ;  they  give  the  opinions  of  the  different 
rhetors  with  regard  to  the  legal  status  of  the  case  under  consider- 
ation, 7.  e.  whether  the  legal  formula  premised  is  applicable  to  the 
case,  and  if  so,  how  far?  This  is  subdivided  \xi\o pars  prior  and 
pars  altera  (or  with  the  second  part  introduced  by  contra^,  giving 
the  pro  and  con  or  the  acciisatio  and  defensio. 

2.  The  divisio,  like  the  disposiiio,  analyzes  and  arranges  the 
material  into  various  qiiaesiiones  or  points  of  view  from  which  the 
case  is  argued.  Seneca''"  points  out  that  the  divisio  of  the  rhetor- 
icians of  his  time  became  more  subtle  than  that  of  former  times. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  the  divisio  was  often  split  up  into  endless  sub- 
divisions, without  gain  to  either  clearness  or  force.  As  a  rule 
moreover  the  divisio  consisted  of  a  mere  skeleton  of  the  quaes- 
tiones  and  their  subdivisions.'^' 

3.  The  colores  are   the  extenuating  reasons  for  a  punishable 

'^^  Seneca  philos.,  P.pisi.  1 14,  i  sq.;  cf.  also  Cucheval,  Hist,  de  V eloq.  rom, 
i,  p.  235  ;   ii,  p.  368. 

'••■•  C.  3  sq. 

'•^  Dialoi^us  c.  28. 

i-'^Cf.  also  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  ii,  4.  I5  sq.  (on  the  vanity  of  the 
parents)  ;   I'ersius,  Sat.  iii,  46  sq. 

'  •<'  Contr.  i,  I,  13. 

'■^Cf.  Seneca,  Praef.  Contr.  vii,  2,  where  Albucius  is  reproached  for 
treating  the  divisio  more  fully.  As  an  example  may  be  given  the  divisio  i, 
3,  8.     A  vestal  for  the  sin  of  incest  was  thrown   from  the  Tarpeian  Rock, 


\ 


30 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


deed,  whcii  however  were  not  founded  upon  facts  but  merely 
invented  oy  the  rhetoricians.'^^  In  fact  the  colores  were  the 
revelling  ground  for  the  wits  of  the  rhetoricians  where  they 
indulg^ed  to  the  full  in  subtleties,  casuistries,  and  absurdities  of 
invention.  Their  methods  of  defence  may  be  shown  by  the 
following  example.  In  defence  of  one,  who  maimed  exposed 
children  and  then  forced  them  to  beg  for  his  benefit,  Gallio 
adduces  :'"  ''  Egentem  hominem  et  qui  ne  se  quidem  alere  necdum 
alios  posset,  sustulisse  eos,  qui  iam  relicti  sine  spe  vix  spiritum 
traherent,  quibus  non  iniuria  fieret,  si  aliquid  detraheretur,  sed 
beneficium  daretur,  si  vita  servarelur.  Faciant  invidiam,  dicant 
alicui  oculos  deesse,  alicui  manus  dicant  illos  per  hunc  tarn  misere 
vivere,  dum  fateantur  per  hunc  vivere."  He  even  attempted  to 
set  up  this  brute  as  a  public  benefactor:  "Adeo  ....  haec  res  non 
nocuit  reipublicae,  ut  possit  videri  etiam  profuisse :  pauciores 
erunt  qui  exponant  filios."  The  condition  of  a  slave  should 
be  looked  upon  in  a  favorable  light  because:  "  Et  nos  nuper 
servos  fuisse.  Rettulit  Servium  regem.''^^*'  If  an  historical  fact 
was  involved  and  the  case  as  it  really  occurred  did  not  suit  the 
pleader,  he  had  no  scruple  about  altering  it.' 


135 


but  was  not  killed.  The  issue  is  :  Whether  she  ought  to  be  thrown  a  second 
time.  Latro  makes  the  following  divisio  :  "  Utrum  lex  de  incesta  tutam 
esse  velit  quae  deiciatur  nee  pereat  ;  an  damnata,  etiamsi  innocens  post 
damnationem  adparuit,  deici  non  debeat;  an  haec  innocens  sit;  an  haec 
deorum  adiutorio  servata  sit."  Cestius  then  subdivided  the  last  question: 
♦'  An  dii  immortales  humanarum  rerum  curam  agant ;  si  singulorum  agunt 
an  huius  egerint."  Fuscus  Arellius  offers  the  f.)llowing  divisio  :  "Utrum 
incestae  poena  sit  deici  an  perire  ;  utrum  providentia  deorum  an  casu  ser- 
vata sit;  si  voluntate  deorum  servata  est,  an  in  hoc,  ut  crudelius  periret." 
Comment  is  needless. 

133  The  rhetoricians  themselves  made  a  distinction  between  defensio  and 
color,  cf.  Seneca,  Cotitr.  vii,  6,  17  :  ''A  parte  patris  magis  defensione  opus 
esse  dicebat  Latro  quam  colore."  The  color  also  served  to  give  a  weak 
point,  which  was  to  be  defended,  a  plausible  aspect.  It  also  served  to 
mention  things  under  another  name  for  the  sake  of  decency,  cf.  Quintilian, 
Inst.  Orat.'w,  2,88:  Id  interim  ad  solam  verecundiam  pertinet,  unde  etiam 
mihi  videtur  dici  color.  Tacitus  {Dialogus  c.  20)  speaks  of  the  "  color  sen- 
tentiarum  "  as  parallel  to  the  ♦'  niter  et  cultus  descriptionum,"  where  it  i^ 
probably  equivalent  to  our  color  or  vividness  of  speech.  Cf.  also  Ernesti, 
Rhet.  lex.\  Mayor's  edition  of  Juvenal  on  Sat.  vii,  155. 

'^''Seneca,  Contr.  x,  4,  15. 

13* //^/V/.  vii,  6,  18. 

i3»  Cf.  ibid,  vii,  2,  8  :  "  Declamatoribus  placuit  parricidi  reum  fuisse  .  .  .," 
cf.  Hainmer,  Beitr.  zu  den  ig  gross,  quintil.  Decl.^  p.  6. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  B\  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


31 


( 


1 


y 


I 


/      ^\ 


(      .- 


The  Suasoriae. — While  the  Controversiae  were  taken  from  the 
genus  iudiciale,  the  Suasoriae  belonged  to  the  genus  delibera- 
tivum  and  related  to  historical  or  mythical  persons,  answering  the 
question  what  some  such  person  was  to  do  in  a  certain  condition 
or  situation.  Hence  in  contrast  to  the  Controversiae,  irto  the 
Suasoriae  names  were  introduced.  In  the  curriculum  of  the  rhe- 
torical schools  the  Suasoriae,  being  the  more  simple  and  easy, 
were  the  exercises  used  in  the  beginning;  the  Controversiae  being 
more  varied  and  complex,  formed  the  last  state  in  the  training  of 
the  future  orator.^^^  A  Suasoria  may  be  simple,  merely  the  ques- 
tion whether  a  certain  thing  is  or  is  not  to  be  done ;"'  or  duplex, 
where  there  is  a  choice  between  two  alternatives  f^  or  triple,  where 
there  are  three  alternatives.^^'^  The  Suasoriae  are  generally  char- 
acterized by  the  absence  of  an  artistic  plan  and  arrangement  of 
the  parts ;  the  speaker  approaches  the  subject  without  an  intro- 
ductory proem  and  discusses  it  in  an  elevated  sometimes  excited 
and  even  harsh  tone.^'"  In  the  Suasoriae  stress  was  laid  not  so 
much  on  the  argumentation  as  on  the  description  of  the  effects 
which  might  result  from  taking  or  omitting  the  step  under  deliber- 
ation/'^ The  division  of  the  Suasoriae  is  likewise  simple.  They 
consist  of  two  parts;  the  first  may  be  termed  iraciaiio;  it  gives 
the  formal  discourse  on  the  question.  The  second  part,  super- 
scribed divisio,  is  an  informal  and  personal  review  or  report  by 
Seneca  of  the  sayings  and  comments  of  the  rhetoricians,  inter- 
mingled with  reminiscences,  anecdotes,  and  an  occasional  excur- 
sus. 

As  has  been  already  stated,  the  defects  of  the  declamations 

13^  Cf.  Westermann,  Geschichte  dtr  Beredsamkeit  ii,  p.  267  §81  ;  Tacitus, 
Dial.  c.  35  :  "Ex  his  suasoriae  quidem,  tamquam  plane  leviores  et  minus 
prudentiae  exigentes,  pueris  delegantur,  controversiae  robustioribus  adsig- 
nantur." 

1"  Cf .  Seneca,  Suas.  i  and  vi. 

^^  Ibid,  ii  ;  iii  ;  iv  ;  v;  vii. 

•39  Cf.  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  iii,  8,  33:  "  Pompeius  deliberabat  Parthos 
an  Africam  an  Aegyptum  peteret."  For  the  Suasoria  simple  and  duplex 
cf.  I.  c.  19  sq. 

^^  Cf.  Quintilian,  /.  c.  8,  58  sq.,  69.  He  censures  this  as  an  error  of  the 
declamators. 

•41  Hence  Ovid's  fondness  for  Suasoriae  and  aversion  to  Controversiae, 
cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ii,  2,  12  :  •'  Declamabat  autem  Naso  raro  controversias  et 
non  nisi  ethicas  ;  libentius  dicebat  suasorias  ;  molesta  illi  erat  omnis 
argumentatio";  cf.  also  Praef.  Contr.  ii,  3;  iii,  10  sq. 


32  THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 

of  the  imperial   period   were   in   general   the  same  as   those  of 
Asianism,— lack  of  moderation,  false  pathos,  a  childish  striving 
for   the   *'inopinatum"   in    thought   and    form,   frigid   a^rreiV/xot, 
perverse  ingenuity,  and  an  ostentatious  display  of  the  speaker's 
art  instead  of  its  concealment.     At  the  same  time  it  must  be 
admitted  that  some  of  the  rhetoricians  handled   this  apparatus 
with  great  skill  and  even  with  elegance.     The  following  are  a  few 
examples  taken  at  random  :    "  Nullum   iam   tibi  vulnus  nisi  per 
cicatricem   imprimi    potest";"^    "  Charybdis   ipsius   maris   nau- 
fragium";'''  •'Duplici  beneficio   uxori  suae  obligatus  est:    quod 
non  est  occisus  et  quod  occidit";"^    '' Ciceronis  proscriptio  fuit 
occidi,  mea  occidere";"'^"Modum  tu  magnitudini   facere  debes, 
quoniam  Fortuna  non  facit.  .  .  Alexander  orbi  magnus  est  Alex- 
andro  orbis  angustus  est " ; "« ''  Ergo  tibi,  soror,  ut  honestos  habeas 
liberos,  adulterandum  est?";"'  ''Amisi  uxorem,  liberos,  patri- 
monium,  fortuna   mihi   nihil   praeter    laqueum   reliquit,   iste  nee 
laqueum";^*''   "  Quidquid  avium  volitat,  quidquid  piscium   natat 
quulquid   ferarum   discurrit,   nostris   sepelitur   ventribus,    qu.tcie 
nunc  cur  subito   moriamur :  mortibus  vivimus.'"*^    Instances   of 
lack  ot  ??iO(i/^s  j.nd  indicium  \\\  descriptions  of  cruelty  and  other 
abhorrent  things   are  found   in  Contr.  x.  4.  2  and  ix,  2,  4.      linw 
far  the  rhetoricians  mnld  go  in  silliness  and  .ihMirdity  is  shuwn 
in    Praet.   Contr.   vii,  S,  where    Albucius   asks;    "  yuare  calix   si 
cecidit   frangitur,   spongia  si  cecidit  non   iran-itin  :-^  '     To   which 
Cestius  aptly   replied:    "head  illinn  eras,  declainahit  vohis.  quare 
turdi  volent,  cucurbitae  non  volent."      Instances  cMliis  sortnnoht 
be  multiplied  indetinitely.    Favorite  digressions  ol  ilu- rhetor  were 
inveiohings  against  the  corruption  of  the  times,''"  and  moralizint^s 
on   the  instability  of  fortune.'"'^   Still  there  are  found  anion-  these 
excrescences    of    an    overstrained      imagination     real     -ems    of 
wisdom:      "  Optinnis    virtutis     finis    est,    antequam   dehcias  des- 
inere";'"    '' Magni    pectoris   est    mtrr    secund.i     moderat  10  "  ; -^^^ 
"Magisdeos  miseri  quain   beati  (olunt'V"'   ■"Nulla  satis    pudica 
est    de    qua    quaeritur "  ;' ■'   '-I.udit    de    suis    lortuna    muiuaihns 
et    quae    dedit    aulert.   quae  ai)stiilit    reddit,   nee   unquam    tuiius 


^'^^ Suas.  i,  13. 
^'^ Snas.  i,  3, 


'**  Contr.  ii,  5,  5. 
'*^  Contr.  vii,  6,  2. 


^^'^  Contr.  i,  S,  3. 

'*^  Contr.  vii,  2,   \\. 

'*«  Conty.  V,  I,   1.  ^'^  Praef.  Contr.  x,  9. 

'^Cf.  Seneca,  Coitr.  ii,  7,  i. 

iS'Cf.  Contr.  ii.  I,  I  ;    V,   I  ;   cf.  also  Moraw>ki,  De  rhct.  lat.,  pp.  5,  u  >q. 

>"  CoKtr.  i,  S,  3.       ^^^Suas.  i,  3.       '^^  Contr.  viii,  i,  2.       '^  Contr.  i,  z,  i. 


> 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


/ 


y 


J 


\ 


V 


Y         I 


33 


est  illam  experiri  quam  cum  locum  iniuriae  non  habet";^^* 
the  three  hundred  Laconians  at  Thermopylae  say :  ''  Electi 
sumus,  non  relicti."'''  The  form  of  the  declamations  is 
characterized  by  the  same  artificiality  as  their  subject-matter. 
In  general  it  bears  the  stamp  of  the  Silver  Latinity,— a  certain 
studied  smoothness,  correctness,  and  elegance,  the  confusion  of 
prose  and  poetic  diction,  of  which  the  author  of  the  Dialogus  de 
Oraioribiis  complains,"*  as  if  all  attention  should  be  given  to  the 
form  instead  of  the  substance,"^  a  copious  use  of  the  apparatus  of 
tropes  and  figures  and  especially  of  the  antithesis.^^°  Here  again 
is  a  lack  of  7nodus  and  iudiciimi.  So,  for  instance,  in  Seneca,  Suas. 
vi,  5  on  Mark  Antony  :  "  Quae  Charybdis  est  tam  vorax  ?  Charyb- 
dim  dixi,  quae,  si  fuit,  animal  unum  fuit;  vix  me  dius  fidius 
Oceanus  tot  res  tamque  diversas  uno  tempore  absorbere  potuis- 
set  ";  or  Contr.  vii,  3,  8,  the  metaphors  used  by  Muredius:  "Abdi- 
cationes  suas  veneno  diluit  .  .  .  mortem  meam  effudit." 

c.  hijltieyice  of  rhetoric  on  other  branches  of  literature. — Con- 
sidering the  important  position  accorded  to  the  rhetorical  schools 
and  riietoric  itself  in  liie  mental  life  of  the  imperial  epoch,  it  is  not 
surprising  that  the  school  declamations  aflected  the  tone  and 
stvlt'  of  otlirr  dejxrrtments  of  literature.  It  should  be  remembered 
th;a  111  the  rhetorical  works  of  Seneca,  the  declamations  bearing 
the  nameofOuintilian.and  the  (iky-owQ  Epiiojnae  decc7n  rhetornvi 
))ii)io>  U})!  o!  Calpiirnius  Maccus,  we  have  but  a  small  remnant  of 
liiose  productions  ot  the  schools  which  were  spread  abroad  in 
book  form.  There  must  have  grown  up  a  sort  of  "  corpus 
declamationnm  "  as  a  thesaurus  for  the  benefit  of  aspirants  to  the 
art  ol  speaking.^*^^     Moreover  although  the  subjects  discussed  in 

^^^  Cont> .  V.   1.  I.  13T  Suas.  ii,  4. 

'^®Cf.  Tacitus.  Dialogus  c.  20:  "  Exigitur  enim  iam  ah  oratore  etiam 
poeticus  decor,  non  Accii  aut  I'.icuvii  veterno  inquinatus,  sed  ex  Horatii  et 
Vc  rgilii  et  Lucani  sacrario  prolatus  ";  Seneca,  Suas.  iii,  4  :  "  Fuscus  Arel- 
lius  Vergilii  versus  voluit  unitari  "";  Ouintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  ii,  4,  3  ;  "  .  .  .  . 
arcessitis  desci  ipiionibub,  in  quas  plerique  imitatione  poeticae  licentiae 
ducuiitur.'* 

^^Cf.  Sei!C(  a,  i'ontr.  vii,  4,  70  ;   ix,  2,  27. 

^^^^  Cf.  I'ersius,  A"<7.',  i,  85  sq.  •'  .  .  .  crimina  raMS  l.ibrat  in  antitiietis,  doc- 
tu>  posuisse  figura-  l.auciatn    '  bellum  hoc  '  !  " 

'*'  This  may  be  infcired  Irom  Seneca,  Praef.  Contr.  i,  19  ;  cf.  also  Main- 
nicr,  Beitr.  zu  den  ig  gr.  quint.  Dccl.,  \<.  9, 


34 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


the  schools  were  out  of  touch  with  actual  life,  the  schools  them- 
selves influenced  living  men.  Single  sayings  of  the  rhetoricians 
were  widely  promulgated  and  became  a  kind  of  e'r^a  T.zeftoe^^ru}^^ 
The  mannerisms  of  the  rhetoricians,  with  their  confusion  of  prose 
and  poetic  diction,  with  their  ''  egressio7ies''  for  the  sake  of 
variety,  in  splendid  descriptions  of  men,  cities,  mountains,  the  sea, 
etc.,^^^  crept  especially  into  the  historical  works  of  the  time.^'^  It 
would  seem  that  while  in  this  epoch  the  various  kinds  of  literature 
became  mixed, — a  characteristic  of  a  nervous  and  unsettled 
period, — the  line  of  demarcation  between  rhetoric  and  history  was 
particularly  effaced.^^^  Among  the  poets  the  one  most  influenr(  d 
by  rhetoric  was  Ovid,^^*  as  Euripides  among  the  Greeks.  Persius 
at  the  age  of  sixteen  became  the  pupil  of  the  rhetor  Cornutus  and 
remained  his  devoted  adherent  for  the  rest  of  his  life.'*'  Lucan 
as  a  fellow -pupil  of  Persius,  also  surrendered  himself  to  the  fasci- 
nating iniluence  ol  Cornutus,'*^*  and  liic  Pharsalia  affords  many 
exani[)les    of    epicuramnintic     power    acquired    in    tlic    rhctc^-ricnl 

^®'^  Cf.  Seneca,  .S/^aj.  ii.  lo:  •' Recolo  nihil  fuisse  me  iuvene  tani  notum, 
quam  has  explicationes  Fusci,  quas  nemo  nostrum  non  alius  alia  incli- 
natione  vocis  velut  sua  quisque  modulatione  cantabat  ":  <^)uintilian,  lust. 
Orat.  viii,  3,  76  :  "  Quae  me  iuvene  uhique  cantari  solebant  ";  'I'acitus, 
Dialogiis  c.  20  :  "  luvenes  .  .  .  imti  solum  audire  seel  ctinm  rcfrne  donnini 
aliquod  inlusne  ct  ciigmun  memoria  volutu  ;  ti;u1unt(juc  invin m  ac  saepe 
in  colonias  ac  provincias  suas  scribunt,  sivc  sciimi>  aiiquis  ari^uta  ct  bicvi 
sententia  afful^it,  sive  li.)cu>  exquisite  f*  j)octico  tultu  ciiituit"';  k{  also 
Morawski,  Ih  r':ct.  Lit.,  pj).  4  ^(|. 

^^3  Cf.  Quintiiian,  Inst.   Orat.  '\\\    :;,  \2. 

^^'^  Op.  cit.  X,  2,  21  :  "  Id  (juoquc  vitainlum,  in  quo  niai^iui  jku^  crrat.  ne 
in  oratione  poctas  nobis  ct  histuric<>>,  in  iilis  C)pfn!)U>  oratorcs  at  (icclania- 
tores  imitatulos  putenuis.  Sua  cuupic  piopo>ita  kx,  suus  cuicjuc  decor  tst  "; 
ct.  also   Lucian    IJcJf    {Stllaropuiv  fT(    ;  ,   ,-  13  ^(j.    j;  ;    Spengcl,  i'c''u-r  das 

Studinni,  etc.,  p.  2S  ;    Hlass,  Pic  gmch.  J^erads.,  p.   146  scj. 

'^  Cf.  Seneca,  Sur.s.  v,  S  :  "...  sententiain  .  .  .  dignam  quae  vel  in  ora- 
tione vel  in  historia  ponatur";  Pliny,  A//j/.  ii,  5:  "Nam  descriptiones 
locorum,  tquae  in  hoc  libro  freqiientiorcs  erunt.  non  histonce  tantum,  sed 
paene  poetice  prosequi  fas  est  "';  Morawski  in  /.ettscurift  fur  die  ,  stcrreu':- 
ischeti  Gyrnmisien  xliv  (1881),  pp.  97  sc[. 

'•''''  Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ii,  j,  S  :  "...  I.atronis  admirator  fuit  (sc.  Ovid)  .  .  . 
adeo  autem  studiose  Latronem  aniavit  ut  multas  illius  sententias  in  versus 
suos  transtulerit  .  .  .  ";  cf.  also  Gruppe,  (Juac'st.  Ann.,  pp.  36  sq.;  Cucheval, 
Hi  St.  de  iViot/.  rorn.  i,  pp.  288  sq. 

'**'Cf.  I'ersius,  Sat.  v,  22-65;    '^i*-^  Cassias  Ixii,  2Q. 

'^'"  Cf.  Monccaux,  Lc,  Afritains,  p.  186;   (Juintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  x,  i,  90. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


35 


/ 


\ 


^ 


school.^^'  The  rhetor  Septimus  Severus  had  as  his  intimate 
friends  the  poets  Statins  and  Martial ;  the  former  dedicated  to 
Severus,  Silvae  iv,  5  (cf.  1.  29-52),  and  the  latter  dedicated  to  him 
four  of  his  epigrams.^'"  The  declamations  had  a  no  less  marked 
influence  upon  the  tragedies  of  the  younger  Seneca.^'^  As  the 
declamations  contain  among  much  chaff  many  precious  grains,  so 
was  their  influence  on  Latin  literature  not  an  unmixed  evil.  On 
this  point  the  judgment  of  Bernhardy  is  as  follows  :  ''The  weak 
as  well  as  the  brilliant  points  of  the  authorsof  that  time  have  their 
final  cause  in  the  declamation  ;  if  on  the  one  hand  we  are  dis- 
turbed by  their  cut  up,  inflated  and  hasty  manner,  they  on  the 
other  hand  nw*  to  rhetoric,  which  was  developed  to  the  extreme, 
an  elasticity  arai  krenness  of  thought  which  compensates  for  the 
shapelessness  and  tastelessness  which  are  met  with  here  and 
there."  ^''"^ 

3.     llie  cJiaraiicr  and  atiaunjitnts  of  tJie  rhctorichuis. 

It  h  IS  l)f -n  stated  already  that  after  the  emperors  took  the 
rhetorical  schools  under  their  protection,  the  social  status  of  the 
rheti^rs  became  in  a  measure  a  respected  and  honored  one.  Rich 
men  eno^ac^red  rhetors  to  i.;ive  exhibitions  of  the  declamatory  art 
for  the  entertainment  of  i;uests  in  their  own  houses. ^"^  At  other 
times  they  delivered  their  discourses  in  schools,  at  their  homes,  or 
in  public  places  such  as  basilicas  and  theaters.  Rhetoricians  were 
often  the  companions  of  prominent  men  :  so  Albucius  Silus  of  Plan- 
cus,'"'  Timagenes  of  Pollio.'"  What  a  colossal  opinion  of  their 
own  importance  and  that  of  their  art  the  rhetoricians  had,  may  be 
seen  from  Aper's  exi)Osition  in  Tacitus,  Dialogus  c.  5-7.^"'    It  may 

'^"Cf.  Lucan,  Pharsalia  iv,  185,  S23. 

*'<>Cf.  Monceaux,  /.  <:.,  p.  189  sq. 

'"'Cf.  Leo,  De  Sni.  frag.  id>s.  crit.,  pp.  147  sq.  Seneca's  tragedies  are 
"  I  )eclamationes  ad  tragoediae  amussim  deductas  et  in  actus  deductas." 

*'-Cf.  Bernhardy,  Grtindnss  dcr  rcDiiscJiiyi  Litttratur,  p.  282. 

'■'•Cf.  Suetonius,  De  rir.  ill.  c.  7  :  "  ^L  Antonius  Grypho  docuit  primum 
in  Divi  Tulii  domo  pueri  adhuc,  deinde  in  sua  privata";  Gruppe,  Qiiaest. 
Ann.,  p.  27. 

'■*Cf.  Suetonius,  Dt'  rJici.  clar.  c.  30. 

'■^  Cf.  Seneca  philos.,  De  Ira  iii,  23. 

'■HJf.  for  instance  c.  7  end  :  "Quid?  fama  et  laus  cuius  artis  cum  ora- 
torum  gloria  comparanda  est  ?  Qui  tarn  inlustres  et  in  urbe  .  .  .  non  solum 
apud  negotiosos  et  rebus  intentf)S  sed  etiam  apud  vacuos  at  adulescentes 
quibus  modo  recta  indoles  est  et  bona  spes  sui." 


/ 


36 


THE    THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


be  safely  asserted  that  the  immoderate  vanity,  conceit,  and  rivalry 
of  the  rhetoricians,  which  led  them  to  make  a  display  of  their 
skill  and  acumen  an  end  in  itself,  or  rather  //w  end,  and  to  adopt 
every  expedient  to  draw  attenton  to  it,  was  a  leading  cause  of  the 
perversion  of  oratory  at  that  time.  As  niioht  be  expected  of 
men  who  lived,  moved  and  had  their  l)ein_o  in  an  unreal  world 
and  whose  lite-work  was  confined  within  the  lour  walls  of  a  school- 
room, the  rhetoricians  must  have  been  as  a  rule  un{)ractical  and 
pedantic.  As  Koerber^"  remarks,  this  may  have  been  imj)lied  in 
the  name  "  scholasticus,"  which  was  j4i\en  to  them.  Thus 
Seneca^"'  says  with  reference  to  Bassus  who  endeavored  in  his 
declamations  to  imitate  the  force  and  earnestness  ol  an  orator  ol' 
the  forum:  "Nihil  est  indecentius  quam  ubi  scholasticus  lorum, 
quod  non  novit,  imitatur.  Amabam  itaque  Capiionem  ....  bona 
fide  scholasticus  erat.''"'  And  Seneca'""  relates  that  Albucius 
affected  in  his  declamations,  vul^^arities  and  low  t expressions  in 
order  not  to  appear  as  a  scholasticus.  The  rhetoricians  took 
their  task  and  the  preparation  tor  it  very  easily.'"'  When  origi- 
nality was  lacking  they  were  content  to  a[)proi)riate  the  mental 
property  of  others,  changing  or  omitting  a  word.'"-'  Still  there 
were  individual  exceptions  who  were  earnestly  devoted  to  their 
art,  and  endeavored  to  cultivate  and  perfect  it.  So  for  instance 
Latro.^'^*  Moreover  there  was  not  an  absolute  lack  of  able  men 
with  sound  judgment  and  clear  insight,  who  made  no  secret  of 
their  opinion  of  the  unwholesome  character  of  the  school  decla- 
mations and  the  shortcomings  of  the  rhetoricians.  The  crushing 
judgment  of  Cassius  Severus^"'  has  been  quoted  already.     Mon- 

^'^  Ueber  di}i  Rhetor  Seneca^  pp.  44  scj. 

^"^^ Fyaef.  Contr.  x,  12, 

^"'■'Cf.  Tacitus,  Dtaloi^us  c.  35:  "At  nunc  adulescentuli  nostii  dctiucuntur 
in  scaenam  scholasticoruni,  qui  rhetores  vocantur  ";  Koerber,  I'eicf  den 
Rhet.  Seneca,  p.  45,  foot  note  212  :  "  In  the  same  mLaning  Tctronius  in  his 
first  Satire  employs  the  word  '  inipracticus,' /.  .r.  'scholasticus,  qui  in  unibia 
sub  tecto  vitani  agit/  according  to  an  old  giosbary  on  i'etronius." 

^*^  Praef.  Contr.  vii,  3  sq. 

^^*  Cf.  Seneca,  Praej.  Contr.  i,  10:  "  (^uis  est,  cjui  memoriae  studeat  ? 
Quis,  qui  non  dico  magnis  virtutibus,  sed  suis  placeat  ?  Sententias  a  diser- 
tissimis  viris  iactas  facile  in  tanta  hominum  desidia  pro  suis  dicunt."' 

^®2  Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  x,  5,  20:  "Multi  sunt,  qui  detracto  verbo  aut 
mutate  aut  adiecto  putent  se  alienas  sententias  lucri  fecissc." 

^®^  Cf.  Seneca,  Praef.  Contr.  i,  2-}^. 

^®*Cf,  Seneca,  Praef.  Contr.  iii,  12  sq. 


/ 


/ 


THE   THEMES    TREATED    CY   THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


37 


tanus  V(Mienus  speaks  in  terms  no  less  sharp  of  the  vanitv  and 
want  of  conscientiousness  of  the  rhetoricians.^"  To  a  certain 
degree  they  seem  to  have  exercised  a  mutual  criticism.^"''  From 
the  lact  that  the  rhetoricians  were  allowed  to  harangue  freely 
against  tyranny,  to  exalt  tyrannicide  in  the  most  glowing  terms, 
and  to  kill  off  their  imaginary  tyrants  to  their  heart's  content, 
unmolested  by  the  actual  tyrants  who  were  sitting  on  the  throne,^" 
it  may  be  inferred  that  they  were  regarded  as  a  harmless  sort  of 
people  and  that  they  exercised  no  influence  whatever  on  the 
movements  of  political  life.  Reference  has  been  made  to  the 
possibility  that  the  emperors  favored  the  rhetorical  schools  as  a 
safety-valve  for  the  lingering  remnant  of  the  old  Roman  love  of 
liberty.  Real  life  as  it  seems  went  on  its  course  ignoring  them  as 
it  was  ignored  by  them.  So  likewise  the  dissensions  of  the 
various  rhetorical  sects^'"  must  have  been  a  harmless  matter, 
merely  in  the  nature  of  personal  attachments  to  individual 
masters,  and  not  as  in  the  warring  philosophical  schools,  a  differ- 
ence of  principles, ''•'  for  the  obvious  reason  that  professionally  the 
rhetoricians  had  no  principles.  It  cannot,  however,  be  too 
strongly  emphasized  that  they  could  never  have  attained  such  a 
height  of  foolishness  and  such  an  absurd  feeling  of  self-importance 
had  they  not  been  strongly  supported  by  the  public  opinion  of 
the  times, ^''  and  the  reason  for  this  strong  support  has  in  it  an 

'^ //'/■/,,  Frdef.  Contr.  ix,  1  scj. 

"*/A;,/.,  Contr.  i,  2,  22;  vii,  5,  7;  ix,  6,  13;  Koerber,  Ueber  defi  Rhet, 
■6V;/.,  pp.  52  sq. 

^^H^f.  Bonnell,  De  mut.  sub.  pmu.  Caes.  Elo.j.,  p.  29. 

^^Cf.  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  ii,  11,  2. 

'^''Cf.  Hlass,  Die  gricch.  Pereds.^  p.  157. 

'•"  Fronto,  perhaps  the  most  courted  and  flattered  of  all  the  rhetoricians, 
expresses  on  almost  every  page  of  his  writings  his  fatuous  consciousness 
that  the  whole  universe  has  its  eyes  fixed  upon  him  (cf.  Ad  amicos,  i,  12); 
that  nothing  exists  outside  of  rhetoric  ;  that  rhetoric  is  the  queen  of  the 
world,  and  that  P>onto  is  the  king  of  rhetors.  His  sorrow  and  disappoint- 
ment when  his  imperial  pupil,  Marcus  Aurelius,  turned  from  rhetoric  to 
philosophy,  are  amusingly  characteristic  of  the  man  (cf.  Monceaux,  Les 
Africains,  pix  215,  227  sq.).  To  explain  such  ridiculous  vanity  it  is  neces- 
sary to  remember  that  the  whole  world  then  thought  of  Fronto  what  he 
thought  of  himself.  He  was  compared  by  his  contemporaries  to  the  ancient 
Greek  orators  and  to  Cato,  and  pronounced  their  superior  (cf.  Monceaux, 
//'/(/.,  pp.  221  sq.).  So  well  did  he  understand  the  prevailing  taste  that  for 
a    long    time    cultivated    Rome   "  Frontonized  ";    his  age    recognized    and 


38 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SEXECA. 


element  of  pathos.  The  Roman,  filled  with  the  memory  of  the 
glory  that  had  been, — the  reality  gone  from  his  citizenship,  from 
his  oratory,  and  from  his  religion, — attributing  to  rhetoric  an 
ethical  power  strong  to  help,  turned  to  it  as  an  end  in  itself/"  his 
only  link  with  the  past,  his  only  means  of  education  lor  tiie 
present  ;  clinging  to  it  with  a  sort  of  despairing  frenzy  lest  if 
sacred  rhetoric  should  perish,  with  it  should  vanish  from  the 
world  his  only  hope  for  the  future.  Only  from  this  point  of  view 
can  be  comprehended  rightly  that  intense  devotion  to  an  artificial 
thing, — a  devotion  which  inevitably  defeated  its  own  purpose. 

admired  itself  in  his  works  (cf.  Mnnccaux.  /'■;./.,  p.  2;,9).  Uiifoi tunatel v  for 
Fronto's  reputation  in  modern  times,  the  disc(>ver\  of  a  portion  <if  liis 
writings  in  a  palimpsest  at  the  beginning  of  this  century,  has  shown  how 
exaggerated  beyond  his  deserts  was  the  estimate  of  his  own  age. 

""  Cf.  Theo,  J'rOi;\  vnid  rnafa  (S{)engcl,  Khet.  (.Jf\u\.  li.  do);  "  sai  ui/v  i) 
(^'(1  XP^'-^C  yvfJ-vaaia  nh  fiovov,  riva  (VvvapLLV  '/oyuv  epyd^erai,  a/j.a  koX  xPV(^T^i>  'i 
V^"C  eyyvfiva^ofitvcjv  i]fxi)V  Tolq  rcjv  aoocjv  cnToodiy/naaiv  ^^]  cf.  also  K'l)b,  Zav 
Attic  Orators  ii.  p.  54. 


/ 


♦  ' 


/ 


/' 


v 


r 


T!!i-:    riii-.M!:.-    r!^!..\ri:i)   \\\  1  n i-:  elder  seneca. 


39 


PART  II. 
I. — Seneca  the  Elder. 

I.     His  life. 

For  a  long  time  it  was  the  fate  of  the  elder  Seneca  not  only  to 
be  overshadowed  by  his  greater  son  the  philosopher,  but  to  be 
entirely  merged  in  him,  so  that  his  writings  were  attributed  to  his 
son  and  always  combined  with  those  of  the  latter.  It  was  Raphael 
of  Volaterra,  who  lived  until  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, who  first  distinguished  Seneca  the  Elder  trom  Seneca  the 
philosopher."-  The  confusion  between  father  and  son  was  fully 
cleared  up  later  by  Justus  Lipsius.^''  To  this  amalgamation  of 
the  two  is  {)robably  due  the  fact  that  the  pracnomeyi  of  the  father 
is  differendy  given.  The  MSS.  have  either  L  (Lucius)  which  is 
the  praenomen  of  the  philosopher,  or  omit  it  entirely,  while  the 
name  of  Marcus  is  first  mentioned  by  Raphael  Volaterra.  This 
may  have  originated,  as  Koerber  surmises, ^■''  from  the  fact  that  it 
was  customary  among  the  Romans  to  give  children  the  praenomen 
of  the  irrandlather,  and  as  the  children  of  Mela^''  and  of  Seneca 
the  philosopher'-"'  bore  the  name  of  Marcus,  it  was  assumed  that 
this  was  the  praenomen  of  the  elder  Seneca  also.'-''  The  praenomen 

'  *'  In  his  Ccnifnentariormn  urhajionwi  octo  et  fri^iuta  libri  Anthropol.  1.  19 
(Rai)hael  Maffeius  Volaterranus);  cf.  .-\ntonius  Ilispalensis,  Bibliotheca 
His  fan  a  -'ftus  i,  1  . 

^■*-''  Elector itr/i  liher  \  (appeared  in  15S0). 

'■^  Ucl'cr  deti  Rhetor  Seneca,  p.  4. 

1^'  The  poet  M.  Lucanus. 

I'^'^Cf.  Seneca  philos.,  Consol.  ad  Helv.  iS,  4. 

'''"H.  J.  Muller,  in  the  preface  to  his  edition  of  Seneca  Rhetor  (Vindo- 
bonae  mdccclxxxvii),  \).  viii,  thinks  it  probable  that  father  and  son  were 
confounded  because  they  had  the  same  praenomen.  Wolftlin  (AV/.  Mus.  1., 
(1S95),  p  320)  assumes  that  the  praenomen  is  Lucius  on  the  ground  that 
Quintilian,  7;/^/.  Orat.x,  i,  i  25,  mentions  the  philosopher  simply  as  Seneca, 
while  ibid.  loi,  114  he  speaks  of  T.  Livius  and  C.  Caesar  to  distinguish  the 
historian  from  the  poet  Livius,  and  the  dictator  from  another  Caesar,  as 
also  Varro  Aticinus  is  cited  by  Priscian  10,  3,  to  distinguish  him  from  M. 
Varro  of  Reate.  Wolfflin  argues  that  Quintilian  would  have  marked  the 
distinction  of  praenomen  between  the  Senccas,  father  and  son,  had  such  a 
distinction  existed.  This  argument  does  not  seem  very  convincing  as 
Quintilian  is  speaking  only  of  philosophers,  so  that  there  was  no  possible 
ambiguity  as  to  which  Seneca  he  meant. 


40 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  I'.V  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


therefore  must  be  regarded   as   uncertain.     Seneca   was   bcun  at 
Cordova  in  Spain.^"     His  family  was  wealthy'"  and  belonged  to 
the  equestrian  order.'^' "     The  date  of  his  birth  can  be  only  approx- 
imately established  by  the  combination  of  other  data.      Seneca 
himself  says'"' that  but   for  the  civil   war  which  kept  him    in   his 
native  province,  he  would  have  had   the  opportunity  ol  hearing 
Cicero  declaiming  with  the  two  great  men  who  bore   the   toga 
praetexta.     By  these  are  to  be  understood  Hirtiusand  I'ansa  who 
were  consuls  in   43  B.  C..-  ^  and  Seneca  mu^t  refer  to  this  very 
year.     The   question    of  Seneca's  age  at   this   time   depends  on 
another,    viz.  at  what  age  pupils  usually  entered   the  rhetorical 
schools.     Koerber-'"  assumes  in  consideration  of  the  confusion  of 
the  courses  of  the  grammatical  and  rht-torical  schoo's  nuntioned 
above,''  that  boys  entered  tht-  rhetorical  schools  at  the  early  age 
of  ten.  and  would  accordingly  fix  the  birth  of  Seneca  in  the  year 
53  B.  C.      But  even  granting  that  some  boys  may  have  come  when 
ten  years  old  under  the  training  of  the  rhetoricians,  it  is  not  likely 
that  one  would  be  sent  at  that  tender  age  from  a  distant  province 
to  the  metropolis  for  the  sake  of  study.      It  st-ems  sater  theretore 
not  to  fix  upon  any  year  as  the  certain  date  of  birth  but  to  leave  it 
undecided  between  60  and  53  B.  C.'^        It  is  generally  assumed 
that  Seneca  visited   Rome  twice.'"'     As  regards  the  date  of  his 
first  coming,  it  would  seem  from  the  passage  Praef.  Contr.  i,   ii 


ni 


'■'"Cf.  Seneca  philos.,  E/^t^^r.,  ix  [VA.  Ilaase)  :  '•Nunc  !uiinin(;u.i  tuu 
deplora,  Corduba,  vatem  .  .  .  Hie  tuus  quondam  nmgnus  tua  gloria  eivis  hi- 
figar  scopulo";  Seneca,  J'raff.  Contr.  1.  i  i  :  ••  Hellorum  civiliuni  furor  .  .  . 
intra  coloniam  meam  nie  continuit  ";  Martial,  i,  61,  7  :  "Duosquc  Scnecas 
unicumque  Lucanum  facunda  loquitur  Cordui)a.'' 

^^*Cf.  Seneca  philos..  Cons    ad  Hei:  .  14,2. 

-<^'Cf.    Tacitus,    Annalcs   .xiv,   53:    "  Egone,    equei,tri    et    provinciali    IolO 
ortus  proceribus  civitatis  adnumcror." 

-^''^  Praef.  Contr.  i,  11. 

■-"■'Cf.  Suetonius,  Dc  clar.  rhet.  c.  i  :  "Cicero  ad  praeturani  usque  Graece 
declamavit  ;  Latine  vero  senior  quoque,  et  quidcni  consulibus  Ilirtio  et 
Pansa,  quos  discipulos  et  grandcs  praetcxtatos  vocabat  ";  ci.  also  Cicero, 
Ad  Fam.  vii,  33,  i  ;   ix,  16.  7. 

''^^Uefwr  den  Rhct.  Soiua,  p.  3.  w  l>age  17. 

-"^Cf.  Clinton, /■(/.(•//  //^//c-zz/cx  ill,  p.  20i,2(.l  edition,  who  adopts  61  15.  C. 
as  the  date  of  Seneca's  birth. 

2^^' Cf.  Seneca,  J'rac-f.  Contr.  iv,  3  :  '' Audivi  auteni  illuni  (sc.  Asinium 
Pollionemj  et  virideni  et  postea  iani  seneni."  This  i)assage,  quoted  by 
\s.Qtxhtx  {Ueber  den  Rliet.  Sentca,  p.  4)  in  support  of  this  assumption,  does 
not  seem  at  ail  decisive. 


f.i 


'     \ 


. 


I'    K 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    TV    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


41 


quoted  in  Note  198,  that  he  left  Cordova  soon  after  the  death  of 
Cicero.     This  date  is  also  supported  by  two  other  passages  of  the 
same  preface  jji^  13  and  24,  in  which  Seneca  relates  that  he  lived  in 
close  triendship  with  Porcius  Latro  from  early  boyhood  ("a prima 
pueritia  ").  and  that  he  heard  him  recite  his  first  Controversia  while 
still  a  youth   ("admodum   iuvenem  ")  in  the  school  of  MaruUus 
where  he  was  himself  a  student.''"     On  the  other  hand  the  civil 
wars  which  prevented  him  from  going  to  Rome  during  Cicero's 
lifetime,  did  not  cease  before  29  B.  C''     How  long  Seneca  re- 
mained in  Rome  on  his  first  visit  is  not  known.     We  may  assume 
that  he  staid  there  long  enough   to  complete  his  rhetorical  edu- 
cation.' '     Returning  to  Cordova  he  married  Helvia  who  belonged 
to  an  old  conservative  family  and  who  seems  personally  to  have 
been  a  woman   of  no   common  parts.''"     By   this   marriage  there 
were  three  sons:   Novatus,  who  was  adopted  by  the  rhetor   L. 
Junius  Gallio,  Lucius  Seneca  the  philosopher,  and  Mela  the  father 
of  the  poet  Lucan.-^^     The  latest  possible  date  of  Seneca's  second 
coming  to  Rome   is  4  A.  D.     For   Asinius  Pollio,  of  whom  he 
says  :■'-   "  Audivi  ilium  et  viridem  et  postea  iam  senem  "  (on  which 
words,  especially  postea,  Koerber  and  Gruppe  base  their  theory 
of  a  double  visit)   died  5   A.  D.     And  at  least    five  years  later 
Seneca  must  have  been  still  at  Rome.'''  The  date  of  Seneca's  death 
can  be  ascertained  only  approximately.     On  the  one   hand  it  is 
certain  that  he  was  still  alive  in  34  A.  D.     For  in  Suas.  ii,  22  he 
speaks  of  the  accusation  raised  against  Scaurus  Mamercus  by  Fus- 
cus,  and  the  extinction  of  the  Scaurus  family  in  the  person  of  this 
Mamercus.     This   accusation  was   made  in  32  A.  D.,'^'  and  two 

2«H:f.  Koerber,  Ceher  dm  Rhet.  Sen.,  p.  5;    Gruppe,  Qiiaesi.  Ann.,  p.  25. 

^*'Cf.  Haunim,  De  rhet.  Grace,  a  Seneca  in  Suas.  et  Contr.  adhib.,  p.  12. 
Baunun  assumes  this  date  for  Seneca's  first  coming  to  Rome  and  offers  the 
exjKanation  that  the  youthful  recitation  of  Latro  and  the  teaching  of 
Marubus  occurred  in  Cordova. 

'"•  Cf.  Koerl)cr,  C\-(>er  den  Rhet.  Sen.,  p.  6;  Gruppe,  Quaest.  Ann.,  p.  25. 
Gruppe  assumes  tiiat  he  did  not  leave  Rome  before  16  B.  C. 

•'^"Cf.  Seneca  philos.,  Consol.  ad  Ileh .,  passim,  especially  xiv  sq. 

-"  They  are  introduced  in  this  order  in  the  prefaces  to  the  Controversiae, 
except  in  that  to  book  ix,  where  Lucius  is  wanting. 

'•'"'^  Praef.  Contr.  iv,  3, 

■"Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  i,  3,  10,  where  he  mentions  "Varus  Quintilius  tunc 
Germanici  gener  ut  praetextatus  ";  Gruppe,  Quaest.  Ann.,  pp.  25  sq. 

-'^Cf.  Tacitus,  Annales  vi,  c.  9  :  "  Appius  Silanus  Scauro  Mamerco  simul 
ac  Sabmo  Calvisio  maiestatis  postulantur  "   (under  Tiberius). 


\ 


I 


42 


THE    THEMES    TRK ATF.D    I'.V    Till'.    F.T.DF.R    SI'XI'.CA. 


years  after,  another  accusation  induced  Maniercus  to  commit  sui- 
cide, by  which,  as  Seneca  says,  his  family  became  extinct.-'"  On 
the  other  hand  Seneca  did  not  survive  the  banishnRiit  ol  his  son 
Lucius,  which  took  place  in  41  A.  D.,"  and  accordm^l)-  the  date 
of  his  death  is  to  be  set  between  34  and  41  A.  D.  These  limits  may 
be  narrowed  if  Suetonius's  account  of  the  deatli  ol  Tiberius  is  an 
extract  from  Seneca's  lost  historical  work,  the  existence  ot  which 
is  attested  by  Seneca  the  philosopher.-^'  The  })assa^e  ol  Sueto- 
nius"' reads:  "Seneca  eum  (sc.  Tiberium  )  scribit,  iniellecta  delec- 
tione  exempturum  annulum  (juasi  alicui  tiadituium  parumper 
tenuisse,  dein  rursus  aptasse  dii^ito  et  comprtssa  sini>tia  manu 
iacuisse  diu  immobilem,  subitoque  vocatis  ministns  ac  iieniine 
respondente  consurrexisse  nee  procul  a  lectulo  deficieritil)us  viri- 
bus  concidisse."  In  this  case  Seneca  wuuid  at  lea.-^t  ha\c  siu'vived 
Tiberius  who  died  37  A.  D.-'^ 

2.   His  chiDactey. 

The  character  of  Seneca  is  reflected  especially  in  the  preiaccs 
to  the  sini^le  books  of  the  Controversiae,  in  which  he  writes  m  an 
unaffected  epistolary  style  as  a  lather  to  his  children,  m  a  tone 
which  bears  the  stamp  of  sincerity  and  conviction.  We  recognize 
a  man  of  the  old  sterling,  almost  severe  Roman,  character  alter 
the  pattern  of  M.  Porcius  Cato,  of  whom  he  was  a  great  admirer.''" 

'•^^"' Cf.  Tacitus,  //';a'.  c.  29  :  '•  Mamcrcus  dein  Scaurus  rursuni  postulalur 
.  .  ,  ab  Servilio  et  Cornelio  accusatorihus  adultcriun:  Liviae.  niagdir.in 
sacra  obiectabantur.  Scaurus,  ut  diL;ivutn  vctcnbus  Aemiliis,  (lainnationem 
anteit,  hortante  Sextia  uxore,  quae  iucitametUum  mortis  et  paiticeps  tnit." 

'^'^This  follows  from  the  pa-^sages  in  Cons. ad  Hen.  li,  4  S(|.:  "Cati-si- 
mum  virum,  ex  cjuo  mater  trium  liberoruni  eras,  extulisti.  Lupeiui  tibi 
luctus  nuntiatus  e>t  omnibus  cjuidem  absentibus  liberis,  i[uasi  dc  indu'-tria 
in  id  tempus  coniectis  malis  tuis,  ut  nihil  es>et  ubi  se  dolor  tuu^  reclinaret. 
Transeo  tot  pericula,  tot  nietus,  quos  sine  intervallo  in  te  incursantes, 
pertulisti;  modo  in  eundem  sinum,  ex  quo  ires  nepotes  emi<eras,  (^ssa 
trium  nepotum  recepisti.  Intra  vicesimum  diem,  quam  tilium  mcum  in 
manibus  et  in  osculis  tuis  mortuuni  tuneraveras,  raptum  me  audisti  ;  hoc 
adhuc  defuerat  tibi  lucere  vivos." 

-I'Cf.  Fragm.  98.  ""^  Tiber,  c.  73. 

-"'Cf.  on  this  question  Niebuhr,  M.  TuH.  lie.  orat.  pro  M.  Font,  et  pro 
Kab.  fragm.;  T.  Liv.  Lib.  xci  fragm.  plen.  et.  emend.;  L.  Sen.  fragm.  ex 
membr.  Bibl.  Vat.,  p.  104  ;  Koerber,  L'ebe)  den  Rhet,  Sen..  \>\>.  S-10  ;  Tcuffel, 
//isi.  0/  Rom.  Lit.  %  269.  5. 

•"oCf.  Praef,  Contr.  i,  9. 


i 


/ 


' 


",^ 


V  ■! 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


43 


He  passes  a  censure"'  upon  the  corruption  and  laxity  of  the  times, 
to  which  there  are  numerous  allusions  in  the  Controversiae,*--  and 
probably  goes  too  far  and  exaggerates,  as  is  usually  the  case  with 
the  huidator  iemporis  acti.  Seneca  indeed  exhibits  some  traces  of 
the  rii^or  ajitiquusr  He  disapproved  of  the  higher  education 
of  women,  "propter  istas  quae  litteris  non  ad  sapientiam  utuntur, 
sed  ad  luxuriam  instruuntur."  In  his  earlier  years  he  took  part 
in  political  hfe  and  was  not  indilTerent  to  political  ambitions  and 
honors ;  but  later  lie  regarded  political  life  as  beset  with  dangers 
com{)ared  with  which  the  life  of  a  scholar  afforded  a  safe  harbor 
but  little  exposed  to  the  storms  of  fate."'  As  far  as  we  know  e\-en 
as  a  scholar  his  activity  was  confined  to  writing,  for  although  it  is 
certain  that  he  passed  much  of  his  time  in  the  rhetorical  schools, 
where  alone  he  could  have  acquired  his  vast  knowledge  of  con- 
temporary rhetoric,  there  is  nothing  whatever  to  show  that  he 
took  any  active  part  in  them  or  that  he  has  the  slightest  claim  to 
the  title  of  rhetor  which  has  been  given  him.  Seneca  show^s  himself 
again  as  an  old  Roman  of  the  Catonian  type  in  his  unconcealed 
antipathy  to  the  Greek  rhetoricians  and  Greek  culture  in  general. 
In  fact  he  overlooks  no  opportunity  of  giving  the  Greeks  a  re- 
buke :  compare  for  instance  Praef  Contr.  i,  6  :  ''insolens  Graecia"; 
Contr.  X,  4,  23:  "Graecas  sententias  in  hoc  refero,  ut  possitis 
aestimare,  primum  quam  facilis  e  Graeca  eloquentia  in  Latinum 
transitus  sit  et  quam  omne,  quod  bene  dici  potest,  commune 
omnibus  gentibus  sit,  deinde  ut  ingenia  ingeniis  conferatis  et 
cogitetis  Latinum  linguam  facultatis  non  minus  habere,  hcentiae 
minus  "  ;  compare  besides :  Contr.  i,  6,  12  ;  i,  7,  12;  i,  8,  7 ;  ii,  6, 
12,  ix,  2,  29.  Still  his  sense  of  justice  occasionally  compels  him 
to  accord  praise  to  the  Greeks,  as  in  Contr.  x,  4,  18,  but  even  this 
he  usually  qualifies  with  a**nescio  an"  when  the  Greeks  have 
the  advantage  in  a  comparison  with  the  Roman  rhetoricians  as 
in  Contr.  i,  4,  10  and  i2.^-"'    As  regards  Seneca's  attitude  toward 

--'  Cf.  Fraef.  Contr.  i,  2,  8  sq.  23. 

2--  Cf.  i,  7,  5  ;    ii,  4,  10  ;    x,  4.  17  sq. 

'^'^Thus  Contr.  iv.  6  he  considers  it  a  weakness  ("  imbecillus  animus") 
in  liaterius  who  had  lost  six  sons,  to  burst  into  tears  in  the  midst  of  a  dis- 
course which  recalled  his  loss  ;  cf.  also  Sen.,  Consol.  ad  Helv.  xvii,  3  : 
"  Patris  mei  antiquus  rigor  .  .  .  Virorum  optimus,  pater  meus,maiorum  con- 
suetudini  deditus." 

'-'•' Cf.  Praef.  Contr,   ii,  3  sq. 

-■'Cf.  liuschmann.  Character  der  gruchiseJie7i  Rhetoren  beim  Rhetor  Seneca, 
pp.   1,  2  ;   Koerber,  Uei'er  den  Rhet.  Sen.,  pp.  63  sq. 


k 


44 


Till-:    TIIK.MES     IREATElJ    KV    TliE    ELDER    SENECA. 


THE    TiiEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


45 


the  political  conditions  of  his  time,  it  may  be  said  that  he  was  on 

the  whole  reconciled  to  the  change  from  the  confusion  and  unrest 

of  the  later  period  of  the  Republic  to  the  imperial  rule,  although 

the  love  of  liberty,  especially  so  far  as  it  concerned  the  freedom 

of  the   scientific   spirit,    was   still   alive   in   his  breast.       He  is  in 

complete  svmpathy  with  Aui^ustus  whom  he  terms  a  "clementis- 

simus  vir,"  "''  and  praises  for  allovvinj^  to  a  certain  extent  freedom  of 

speech.""    But  he  is  tully  aroused  to  ire  by  the  literal  v  auto-da-fcs 

of  his  time."-"    He  has,  however,  no  sympathy  for  those  toolhardy 

persons   who   would   rather   risk   their   heads  than    forego   some 

seditious  saying.-"'-' 

3.   His  7criiino;s. 

The  rhetorical  writings  of  Seneca  which  have  survived  under 
the  title  "Oratorum  et  rhetorum  sententiae,  divisiones,  colores," 
consist  of  one  book  of  Suasoriae  and  ten  books  of  Controversiae.'""* 
The  first  contains  seven  themes,  of  which  the  beeinnint'  is  incom- 
plete,  and  Bonnell  is  perha})s  ri^ht  in  thinking  that  they  repre- 
sent only  a  small  remnant  of  the  original  number  of  Suasoriae, 
possibly  not  even  the  whole  of  the  first  book.*''  Of  the  ten  books 
of  Controversiae,  only  five,  viz.  i,  ii,  vii,  ix  and  x,  have  the  decla- 
mations, thirty-five  in  number,  in  full,  although  even  these  exhibit 
many  lacunae. -^^  Of  the  thirty-nine  Controversiae  of  the  other 
books,  viz.  iii,  iv,  v,  vi  and  viii,  there  are  in  existence  only  the 

^■'^  Praef.  Contr.  iv,  5. 

■-'-'"  Cf.  C(?///'r.  ii,  4,  5  :  "  Tanta  auttm  sub  ciivo  Augusto  liheitas  fait,  ut 
praepotenti  tunc  M.  Agrippae  non  defuennt  qui  ignohilitateiii  cxprobra- 
rent."  It  was  by  no  means  an  excessive  freedom  of  speech  wiiich  Augu>tus 
left  to  the  proud  Romans. 

-'-'^  Cf.  Praff.  Contr.  x,  6,  where  he  says  of  the  burning  of  tlu-  writings  of 
Labienus  :  "  Bono  hercules  publico  ista  in  poenas  ingeniorum  versa  crude- 
Htas  post  Ciceroneni  inventa  est";  §  7  :  **  Facem  studiis  subdtrt'.  ct  in 
monumenta  disciplinarum  animadvertere  quanta  et  quam  non  contti.ia  cet- 
era materia  saevitia  est." 

■-'**Cf.  Contr.  ii,  4,  13  :  "...  sed  horum  non  possum  misercri,  cjui  tanti 
putant  caput  potius  quam  dictum  perdere." 

-^"'That  the  division  of  the  Controversiae  into  books  originated  with  Sen- 
eca himself,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  each  book  is  introduced  bv  a  piciace. 

'-'^^  Cf.  Bonnell,  Df  niut.  sub.  prirn.  Caes.  cio<;.,  \).  22:  "  Videtur  autem, 
quae  ad  nos  pervenerunt  septem  (sc.  Suasoriae)  exigua  tantum  j)ars  a  Sen- 
ecae  libris  mandatum  f uisse,  fortasse  ne  primus  quidein  liber  integer,  quo 
certe  numero    antiquissima  vSuasoriarum  editio  Veneta  inscribitur." 

-'■'-The  ignorance  of  the  copyist  played  special  havoc  in  transcribing  the 
dicta  of  the  (xreek  rhetoricians  ;  cf.  Buschmann,  C/it:r.  an-  ^-^r/^,  v.  h'/if!.  beini 
Rhet.  Seneca,  p.  3. 


Excerpts.'''  In  this  loss  it  is  some  consolation  that  the  valuable 
prefaces  to  books  iii  and  iv  have  been  preserved.  In  regard  to 
the  date  of  composition  of  the  writings  we  know  that  Seneca  pro- 
duced them  in  extreme  old  age."'  For  a  more  precise  date  the 
same  points  come  under  consideration  which  were  discusseci  c  i  n- 
cerning  the  date  of  his  death,  7.  e.  they  must  have  been  written 
between  34  and  41  A.  D.  Schanz'''  would  limit  this  interval  to  the 
first  years  of  Caligula's  reign,  because,  he  thinks,  during  the  reign 
oi  Tiberius,  Seneca  would  not  have  dared  to  quote  in  Suas.  vii,  19 
from  the  book  of  Cremutius  Cordus,  which  had  been  officially 
burned,  in  a  work  which  was  intended  not  only  for  his  sons  but 
lor  the  public.  Schanz  quotes  Praef.  Contr.  i,  10:  "Quaecunque 
a  celeberrimis  viris  facunde  dicta  teneo,  ne  ad  quemquam  priva- 
tim  pertineant,  populo  dedicabo."  But  this  is  not  at  all  conclu- 
sive. Seneca  may  have  intended  his  rhetorical  writings,  which  he 
composed  m  the  first  place  at  the  request  and  for  the  benefit  of 
his  sons,  for  the  general  public,  yet  not  have  delivered  them  to 
the  j)ublic  during  his  lifetime,  but  entrusted  this  matter  to  his  sons, 
so  as  not  to  come  into  conflict  with  the  tyrannical  Tiberius  even 
if  he  censured  him  in  his  book.-""    The  Controversiae  were  com- 

^^33  (^f.  Bursian  in  the  Preface  to  his  edition  of  Seneca,  p.  vii  sq.,  concern- 
ing the  date  ot  origin  and  the  value  of  tlie  E.xcerpts  :  "  Controversiarum 
libros  magna  fuis>e  etiani  apud  posteriores  aevi  homines  auctoritate  ex  eo 
collieerc  liceat,  quod  saeculo  fere  quarto  vel  quinto  p.  Chr.  n.  extitit  qui  illas 
ad  scholaruin,  ut  mihi  videtur,  usus  in  epitomen  redegerit,  praefationes 
autem  sive  epistulas  ad  tilios  datas,  quas  Seneca  singulis  libris  praemiserat 
integras  in  banc  exerptorum  collectionem  transtulerit,  exceptis  praefa- 
tiouibus  libri  quinti,  sexti,  octavi,  et  noni,  quas  cur  omiserit  rationem 
reddere  non  ])ossumus.  Epitimator  autem  quisquis  fuit  in  negotio  suo 
exsecjuendo  nee  satis  petite  nee  satis  diligenter  est  versatus  ;  nam,  ut  omit- 
tam  quod  j)!uiinia  ex  aibitrio  suo  immutavit,  hand  raro  sententias  tarn  arte 
cum  abis  connexas  ut  sine  damno  ab  illis  divelli  non  possent,  nexu  exsolutas 
ita  posiiu  ut  legentibus  nobis  ineptae  omnique  sensu  destitutae  videantur 
.  .  .  (^)uin  ctiam  est  ul)i  sententias  a  Seneca  positas,  quia  non  intellexerat 
prorsus  corruperit '";  zi.  Y^ow\\z^x,  Qtiaest.  in  Sen.  patr.  crit.^  p.  12;  H.  J. 
Midler  m  the  Preface  to  his  edition  of  Seneca,  p.  xxii. 

'*'*Cf,  Seneca,  Iraef.  Contr.  i,  2  :  "  Sed  cum  multa  iam  mihi  ex  meis  des- 
ideranda  senectus  fecerit,  oculorum  aciem  retuderit,  aurium  sensum  hebe- 
taverit,  nervorum  tirmitatem  fatigaverit  ..." 

'^^-''  Ceschic/ite  (ler  rotnischen  I.itteratiir  u,-^.  200;  cf.  also  Bursian  in  the 
Preface  to  his  edition  of  Seneca,  p.  vii. 

•'^'i'hat  he  entrusted  scjme  works  to  his  son  Seneca  the  philosopher,  for 
publication,  follows  from  the  passage  of  Seneca  philosopher,  fragm.  98  (ed. 
Haase  iii,  p.  436);  cf.  Koerber,  Ueber  den  K/iet.  Sen.,  pp.  9  sq. 


/ 


46 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


47 


posed  before  the  Suasoriae.-'^'  The  primal y  reason  of  SciKca's 
writing  his  rhetorical  works  was  the  request  ot  hi^  sons  who 
desired  to  beconie  .icquainted  witli  tht-  sayini^s  oi  the  rhetoricians 
in  order  to  form  an  independent  judgment  on  them."  ~  At  the 
same  time  the  work  was  intended  for  the  general  public  eventu- 
ally."'" Still  a  third  motive  was  to  rescue  some  ol  the  prcniinent 
rhetoricians  from  oblivion  or  irom  wiiat  is  worse,  misrepresenta- 
tion.-'" 

Besides  the  Suasorlae  and  Controversiae,  Seneca  composed  an 
historical  work  on  the  period  from  the  beginning  of  ilie  (  ivil  wars 
down  to  his  own  time,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  some  other  works 
which  have  been  lost.  This  would  follow  h'om  what  his  son  says 
in  irai^m.  9S:  "Si  quaecunque  composuit  i)ater  nuns  et  edi 
voluit,  iam  in  manus  populi  eniisissem,  ad  clar::atem  nommis  sui 
satis  sibi  ipse  prospexerat :  nam  nisi  me  decipit  pietas,  cuius  hon- 

■-^■' Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ii,4,8:  "  <^uae  dixerit  (^c  I.atn^)  suo  loco  rcclclarn 
cum  ad  suasorias  vt  nero."  This  ))a-^age  confirms  the  opinion  tliat  the 
Suasoriae  extant  do  not  represent  all  which  were  edited  l>v  Senec  a  as  he 
would  scarcelv  have  failed  to  reproduce  tliis  long  Suasoria  t-t  his  Ix-uned 
Latro.  In  the  MSS.  and  most  of  the  editions  the  Suasoriae  are  placed  be- 
fore the  Controversiae  in  accordance  with  the  gradation  adopteti  fot  instruc- 
tion in  the  rhetorical  schools,  wheie  the  Sua-oiiae  being  easier  came  first. 
Cf.  Schott  in  his  Preface,  p.  7  :  "  Ltsi  non  me  fugit  ControveI^ia^  piiusedi- 
disse  AL  Aniiaeum  quam  Suasorias,  has  enim  Controversia  \ii  pxanittit, 
tamen  feci  libenter  ut  has  illis  ordine  anteponerem,  cum  tradendarum  artiuni 
Methodo,  quae  perfaciliora  notaque,  ad  ea  quae  difficilia  magis,  obscura 
atque  ignota  sunt,  viam  sternit,  tum  piiorum  editionuni  exemplo  Frobinii, 
etc.''  Cf.  Teuffel,  Hist,  of  Rcvi.  Lit.  %  269,  7  ;  IL  J.  Mailer  (  I'rcface,  p.  viii) 
thinks  it  might  be  concluded  from  the  circumstance  that  the  end  of  the 
Controversiae  and  the  beginning  of  the  Suasoriae  are  wanting,  that  in  the 
older  MSS.  now  lost,  the  Suasoriae  were  preceded  'n-  the  Controversiae. 
The  lacuna  could  thus  be  easily  explained  by  the  loss  of  several  leave>  or 
an  entire  quaternion.  But  if  the  Suasoriae  preceded  the  Controversiae  this 
lacuna  may  be  easily  accounted  for  in  another  way,  viz.  the  beginning  and 
end  of  a  book  are  the  first  to  suffer  all  kinds  t)f  vicissitudes. 

'-3SCf.  Praef.  Contr.  i,  i  :  "  Jubetis  ...  ah  illis  (sc.  declamatoribus)  dicta 
colligere,  ut,  quamvis  notitiae  vestrae  subducti  sint,  tamen  non  credatis 
tantum  de  illis,  sed  et  iudicetis." 

•-'39  Cf.  Ibid.  \    10. 

■'*''Cf.  Ibid.  §  II  :  "  Ipsis  cjuoque  multum  praestaturus  videor,  cpiibus  ob- 
livio  imminet,  nisi  aliquid  quo  niemoria  eorum  producatur,  posteris  trad- 
itur.  Fere  enim  aut  nuUi  conimentarii  maximorum  declamatornm  extant 
aut,  quod  peius  est,  falsi.  Itaque  ne  aut  ignoti  sint  aut  aliter  quam  debent 
not!,  summa  cum  fide  suum  cuique  reddam." 


\y\ 


^ 


estas  etiam  error  est,  inter  eos  haberetur,  qui  ingenio  meruerunt 
lit  puris  scriptoruin  tituiis  nobiles  essent.  Quisquis  le^^ieset  eius 
historias  ab  initio  bellorum  civilium,  unde  primum  Veritas  retro 
obiit,  paene  uscjue  ad  mortis  suae  diem,  maoni  aestimaret  scire, 
quibus  natus  esset  parentibus  ille,qui  res  Romanas.  .  .  ."  Whether 
the  ''  quaecuncpie  "'  refers  to  works  besides  the  history,  and  whether 
these  works  were  independent  treatises  on  rhetoric  as  Koerber^" 
surmises,  is,  althouoh  very  likely,  not  certain.  Nor  does  the  pas- 
sage seem  conclusive  which  is  quoted  by  Quintilian  from  a  Con- 
troversia ot  Seneca  to  support  the  view  that  Seneca  published 
declamations  of  his  (Avn.  For  Koerber's  arguments"''  to  prove 
that  this  passai^e  is  not  trom  one  of  the  Controversiae,  /.  e.  which 
Seneca  merely  collected  and  which  were  afterward  lost,  are  not 
decisive.  The  tone  and  tenor  of  the  passage  in  question  are 
entirely  in  keeping  with  the  style  of  the  Controversiae  which  we 
find  in  the  collection  of  Seneca,*'"  and  the  theme  is  in  a  degree 
parallel  to  that  of  Contr.  vi,  7. 

4.    Value  of  Jus  rhetorical  uuritiji^s. 

The  rhetorical  writings  are  the  richest  and  most  trustworthy 
source  of  our  information  on  the  methods  and  condition  of  the 
study  of  rhetoric,  and  since  rhetoric,  as  has  been  said  above,  com- 
prised the  whole  of  what  we  term  a  liberal  education,  we  may  add 
of  the  pursuit  of  liberal  studies  and  general  culture  in  the  ages  of 
Augustus  and  Tiberius.  It  is  true,  they  do  not  convey  an  adequate 
picture  of  the  schools  of  that  time;  the  individual  declama- 
tion is  not  presented  as  it  was  delivered  and  discussed  in  some 
detinite  place  and  at  a  definite  time,  but  solely  with  regard  to  its 
contents.  For  since  most  of  the  themes  were  stereotyped  and  in 
vogue  in  various  schools,  Seneca  reproduced  what  he  has  heard 
on   each   of  them  in   several   places   and  on  several  occasions.^** 

241  Ueber  den  Rhd.  Sni..  p.  22.  ^'■-'  Loc.  cit. 

-^'•Cf.  Quintilian,  hist.  Orat.  ix,  2,  42:  "Nov!  vero  et  praecipue  decla- 
matores  audacius  nee  mehercule  sine  motu  quodani  imaginantur ;  ut  Seneca 
ista  in  controversia,  cuius  summa  est,  quod  pater  filium  et  novercam  indu- 
cente  altero  filio  in  adulterio  deprehensos  occidit  :  Due,  sequor  ;  accipe 
hanc  senilem  manum  et  quocunque  vis  imprime.  Et  post  paulo,  Aspice,  in- 
quit,  quod  diu  non  credidisti.  Ego  vero  non  video,  nox  oboritur  et  crassa- 
caligo." 

■-'"  Cf.  5.v</j.  ii,  11:  "Non  quidem  in  hac  suasoria,  sed  in  hac  materia 
dissertissima  ilia  fertur  sententia  Uorionis";  ibid.  12  :  "  Occurrit  mihi  sen- 
sus  in  eiusmodi  materia  a  Severo  Cornelio  dictus";  cf.  also  Contr.  i,  2,  22. 


48 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


Still  we  have  the  personal  observations  and  experier.ces  of  a  man 
devoted  to  the  siihject  in  question,  who,  notwithstanding  hv  was  in 
the  noise  and  clanior  of  the  schools,  preserved  a  clear  insight  Aud 
a  sober  judt^nient.  This  he  shows  am()ly  in  the  prefaces  to  the 
various  books  of  the  Controversiae  and  his  personal  ren^.nks 
interspersed  throui^liout  the  cK-cLiniations.  Tla-  prefarts  art-  the 
most  reada[)le  portions  ol  the  work  and  nr^t  onU-  ata-  most  impor- 
tant for  a  knowk-di;e  of  the  lite  and  character  of  Seneca  hun^^elf, 
but  also  contain  the  most  direct  information  concernir.^  the  state 
of  literary  taste  and  education  .is  well  as  iiie  li'e.  methods,  and 
manners  of  tiie  prominent  rhetors.  The  stvle  ot  tlie  ])refaces 
shows  few  traces  of  the  intluence  of  SiKar  Latinit\-  aiul  is  not 
inelecrant."'''  Seneca  imitated  Cicero,  wliom  he  .idmned  so 
much,''"  not  without  success.  The  style  of  the  pretac o  •>  lii.uked 
by  clearness,  [)recision.  purity  of  ex|)ression,  and  a  r-  -inai  .md 
perspicuous  periodic  structure.  In  the  declamations  the  influence 
of  the  Silver  Latin  is  predominant.  The  cjuestion  arises,  to  whom 
are  the  diction  I'.nd  ^t}de  of  the^e  (^the  Conti  oversiae  and 
Suasoriae)  to  be  attni)Uted  ?  1  lave  we  in  them  a  fan h mi  leprodaic- 
tion  in  f^arm  and  contents  of  the  saymi;s  oi  each  rhetorician  to 
whom  they  are  ascribed  ;  or  did  Seiieea  tree  Iv  -ixe  ilie  ila  u<  Ins 
of  the  rhetors  his  owai  form  ^  This  latter  view  is  achipted  iiy 
Teuffel.-''  But  the  diiterence  between  the  lanc:nai^e  oi  theprelaces 
and  that  ot  the  declamations,  .md  alsomthe  m. inner  of  expression 
of  the  ditlerent  rhetoricians,  is  so  marked  th.it  it  would  sec  in  that 
Seneca  endeavored  also  to  reproduce  the  peculiarities  of  the 
style  of  the  individual  rhetors.  This  is  the  view  adopted  \>v  AL 
Sander''"  and  H.  T.  Karsten.'"  Tliey  re,^ard  the  worchin-  oi  the 
declamations  as  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  Seneca  to  rejjrotiuce  the 
varyin^i;-  styles  of  the  diftereiit  speakers,  and  .i{)peai  to  the  fict 
that  Seneca  had  no  other  sources  for  his  work  than  h;s  memory 
which,  good  as  it  was,  could  not  be  exj-ecteci  to  be  absolutely 
faithful  as  regards  the  details  of  the  mode  o;  (  xpression,     They 

2*^  Cf.  Schott,  Dc  auci.  ei  decl.  rat.,  p.  5.  **  De  cuius  scriptoris  stylo  ita 
iudicare  non  dubiteni,  nihil  esse  in  lingua  l.atina,  cum  a  Cicerone  Fabioque 
discesseris,  scripto  purius  et  elegantius." 

^^Cf.  Praef.  Contr.  i,  7.   11;   Suas.  vi,   i  4  sq. 

'^'  Hist,  of  R.^rn.  Lit.  %  269.  6. 

2*^  Quacst.  in  Sci:.  rUc't.  synS.,  p.  4  sq.;  Der  Sprachgebrauch  des  Rhet.  A /in. 
Sdii.  i.  p.  1  sq. 

^^^  De  eloc.  rhet.  i/ual,  inven.  :>i  .-hin.  Sen.  suas.  et  contr, ^  pp.  9  sq. 


\ 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


49 


/ 


^   I  ^\ 


remind  us,  liowever,  that  Seneca  refers  with  pride  to  the  prodigious 
power  of  his  memory,  which  bordered  on  the  miraculous."" 
Besides,  as  Karsten  observes,  it  is  not  at  all  impossible  that 
Seneca  assisted  his  memory  by  consulting  the  vari(;us  collections 
of  declamations  in  current  use,  to  the  existence  of  which  he  often 
refers.'''  Does  it  not  seem  altogether  probable  that  Seneca  had 
also  notes  taken  by  himself  while  listening  to  the  declamations? 
Many  of  the  epigrammatic  phrases  scattered  throughout  his  work 
are  so  good  that  it  seems  as  if  they  must  be  in  the  exact  words  of 
the  speakers  who  uttered  them.  Sander  and  Karsten  remind  us 
that  the  'haracteristics  of  the  style  of  the  different  rhetoricians,  as 
given  by  Seneca  in  the  prefaces,  are  really  verified  by  the  sayings 
quoted  from  them  afterwards.  It  is  shown  that  the  st\le  of  the 
individual  rhetoricians  as  represented  in  Seneca's  work,  differs 
not  only  in  a  general  way  but  also  in  some  definite  details."' 
Still  it  seems  necessary  to  assume  that  the  stylistic  peculiarities  of 
the  individual  rhetors  are  somewhat  effaced,  as  even  a  most 
])henomen  tl  i]iem<a-y,  assisted  by  notes,  would  scarcely  be  able  to 
reproduce  in  all  their  details,  discourses  delivered  many  years 
previously.'"  iMoreover  we  must  not  regard  the  reports  of 
Seneca  as  a  reproduction  in  full  of  the  speeches  delivered  in  the 

250  cf^  Praef,  Contr.  i,  2  sq.:  **Hanc  (sc.  niemoriam)  aliquando  adeo  in 
me  floruisse,  ut  non  tantuni  ad  usum  sufficeret  sed  in  miraculum  usque  pro- 
cederet,  non  nego  ;  nam  et  duo  milia  nominum  recitata  quo  erant  ordine 
dicta  reddebam  ct  ab  his,  qui  ad  audiendum  praeceptorem  mecum  conve- 
nerant,  singulos  versus  a  singulis  dates,  cum  plures  quam  ducenti  eftice- 
rentur  ab  ultimo  incipiens  usque  ad  primum  recitabam.  Nee  ad  complec- 
tcnda  tantum  quae  vellcni  vclox  mihi  crat  memoria,  sed  etiam  ad  conti- 
nenda  quae  acceperai  solehai  bonae  fidei  esse."  That  Seneca  does  not 
exaggerate  is  evident  from  the  tone  of  simplicity  (cf.  ibid.  19)  in  which  he 
speaks  of  the  acquiicmcnt  of  a  good  memory  as  something  easy,  and  men- 
tions several  cases  as  llortensius  and  the  legate  of  Pyrrhus.  For  other 
instances  of  men  endowed  \vith  an  e^traordinary  memory  cf.  Schott,  Z)^ 
auct,  et  decl,  rat.,  p.  i  ;  so  that  there  is  no  reason  for  disbelieving  Seneca's 
description  of  his  own. 

"'  Cf.  Praef.  Contr,  i,  i  1  ;  in,  3.  13  ;  iv,  2 ;  Contr.  ix,  6,  18  ;  Praef.  Contr. 
X,  3.  8  and   I  2. 

"'-Thus  for  instance  "idcirco,"  which  occurs  in  the  sayings  of  Latro,  is 
never  used  by  Seneca  himself,  while  the  other  rhetoricians  use  in  its  stead 
"  ob  hoc,  ob  id,  etc.  '*  ;  cf.  Sander,  Quaest.  in  Sen.  rhet.  synt.,  pp.  5  sq. 

'•'•^'Cf.  Benhardy,  Griindr.  der  rbvi.  Litt.,  p.  792:  '«  Die  Form  ziemlich 
dasselbe  subjective  Gepr.ige  des  Erzahlers  tragi";  Y^o^xh^x,  Ueber  den 
Rhet.  Sen.,  jij).  14  sq. 


N 


50 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


schools  ;  much  is  written  in  a  compressed  and  abrupt  manner, 
bearing  out  the  theory  of  note-taking  suggested  above  ;  some  of 
it  seems  Hke  portions  of  a  table  of  contents.  All  this  is  not  to  be 
overlooked  in  judging  the  style  of  the  individual  rhetors  and  may 
account  fur  many  appaiLi.ily  cramped  and  artificial  sentences."* 
In  fact,  Seneca  neither  intends  nor  pretends  lo  be  an  objective 
narrator  of  what  had  hrtn  croinor  on  in  the  schools.  In  the-  third 
part  ot  the  Controversiae  (the  colores)  ;nui  the  second  part  «  f  ilie 
Suasoriae  (the  divisid),  he  especially  indulges  in  digressions  and 
ex  parte  remarks  of  all  kinds.  Now  he  atldresses  his  sons,  calling 
their  attention  to  certain  circumstances  or  recalling  something 
said  heiore.'"'  Now  he  volunteers  hi>  jutl<^nu  r,t  on  some  saying 
ot  a  rhetor  or  disc»i>ses  some  passage  Irom  a  poet,  which  is  but 
loosely  connected  with  the  scholastic  subject  in  hand.  Mc-t  of 
all  he  delii'htsin  reminiscencesand  anecdotes concci  nin^  the  rhetor- 
icians  and  others."'^"  Occasionally  even  a  jest  is  v«.  nture(i  upon.*" 
If  all  this  interfeies  with  the  ohjeclixity  ol  Sepicca's  nariation,  aid 
confirms  the  opinion  ex{)ressed  above  that  we  fnui  m  the  Contro- 
versiae and  Suasoriae  Ijut  an  inadecjuate  j)!cture  o!  tiie  i;!e  and 
action  of  the  rhetorical  schools,  still  we  may  assert  that  Sem  ca 
was  a  subjective  writer  with  a  very  powerful  memorv  winch 
enabled  him  to  reproduce  the  characteristics  of  the  ctitieient 
rhetors,  and  this  intermingles  somethini^  ot"  lile,  fiesh  arai  warm, 
with  the  cold  subtleties  and  casuistries  ot  the  main  l)oii\-  ol  the 
work. 

5.   His  attitude  toicard  yJi-'toric  and  the  rhetoriciaus. 

Seneca  approached  the  work  of  rccordin;^  liis  reminiscerices  of 
life  in  the  schools  with  much  cheerfulness  and  pleasure'  and  is 
most  enthusiastic  about  the  art  and  study  ot  rlutoric,  wliich  in 
his    opinion  is    the    noblest  of  all   pursuits'"'  and   the   means  oi 

•-'^  Seneca  sometimes  states  explicitly  that  he  has  oinitti-d  ceitans  pas- 
sages of  the  discourses,  and  gives  a  biiel  tiint  ut  the  oniutetl  jxntK  i>.  cl. 
Contr.  i,  8,  10  :  "  Hie  e.xempta  "  ;  ii,  0,  25:  "  111c  vitioium  exprobai.o"; 
vii,  G,  13  :    "  Deinde  de  aniniu  ser\i,'"  etc. 

^^•^  Cf.  Conlr.  vii,   i,  27;   Suas.  i,  16;    ii,   ic. 

-^•' Cf.  Ct'w/r.  ii,  2,  12  ;    ii,  4,  1 1  ;   vii,  3,  y;   vii,  4,  6  ;  ^"/<...f.  iii,  5  sq. 

--'•''  Cf.  Co)itr.  X,  5,  Z%. 

-'='"Cf.  Praef.  Contr.  i,  i  :  "  Ex:gitis  rem  magis  iucundam  mihi  quaiu  taciie 
.  .  .  iucunduui  mihi  redire  in  antiqua  studia  ujeiioresque  ad  annt>>  rcspi- 
cere." 

^-'^Cf.  Fracj.  Conir.  ii,  3  :  "  pulcherrima  discipUna.'' 


\ 

V 


i 


r 


[ 


» 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


51 


entrance  to  all  liberal  culture.'*"  But  he  is  not  a  blind  devotee  to 
any  and  every  kind  of  rhetoric.  He  complains  bitterly  of  the 
condition  of  the  art  in  his  own  time''' and  distinguishes  the  decla- 
matio  from  tlie  "  solidum  scripti  genus.'"^'  In  several  passages  m 
the  prefaces  he  lavs  down  rules  on  the  art  of  rhetoric  :  the  student 
siiould  ac(|uamt  Inmself  with  several  models:  "Quo  plura 
exempla  inspccta  sunt,  ])lus  in  eloquentiam  proficitur.  Non  est 
unus,  cpianiMs  })raecipuus  sit,  imitandus,  quia  nunquam  par  fit 
imitator  auctori  .  .  .  ."^^  The  endeavor  to  imitate  deprives  one  of 
firmness  ol  judi^ment  ;  "  Hoc  ill!  (sc.  Albucio)  accedebat  incon- 
staiitia  iudicii:  (juem  proxime  dicentem  commode  audiebat  imitari 
volebat."-  '  Subtlety  of  thought  must  be  concealed  in  order  to  be 
effective.""'  He  condemns  severely  the  use  of  sordid  and  obscene 
expressions.-'"'  The  style  should  have  vigor  without  straining  for 
elaborate  and  exaggerated  effects.'''  The  fulness  of  expression 
should  not  l)e  overloaded."'"  The  discussion  should  be  clear  and 
simple,  but  solid.'"  The  argumentation  should  be  neither  clumsy 
nor  involved.'"'  As  a  sum  total  of  the  qualities  of  a  good  speaker, 
according  to  Seneca's  view,  may  be  added  his  characterization 
ol  Cassius  Severus:  "  Omnia  ergo  habebat,  quae  ilium,  ut  breve 
declamaret,  instruerent  :  phrasin  non  vulgarem  nee  sordidam,  sed 
electam,  genus  dicendi  non  remissum  aut  languidum,  sed  ardens 
et  concitatum,  non  lentas  nee  vacuas  explicationes,  sed  plus 
sensuum  quam  verborum  habentes,  diligentiam,  maximum  etiam 
mediocris  ingenii  subsidium.'"'^  Seneca's  comments  and  criti- 
cisms, embodying  his  views  and  principles  in  detail,  are  inter- 
spersed among  the  savings  of  the  individual  rhetors,  over  some 
of  whom  he  grows  quite  enthusiastic,  as  for  instance  Latro,''-and 
Crassus  Severus.'''  Others  are  pointed  out  in  contradiction  to 
these  worthy  exponents  of  their  art,  as  being  conspicuous  for 
stupidity  and  absurdity.'"    Still  all  are  dealt  with  fairly  and  no 


est  ; 

lit  a 

26* 
263 
966 

VtiT 
268 
970 
'.'72 
•-■74 

ribU 


Ct.  //'/(/.,  3  :  "  Facilis  ab  hac  (-c.  elucjuentia)   in  omnes  artes  discursus 
instruit  etiani  quos  non  sibi  exercct." 

Cf.  Prafj.  Con!) .  i,  6  sq. ;    Praif.  Contr.  iii,  i  ;   Pracf.  Contr,  x,  12. 
Cf.  Conir.  i,  8,  16  ;  Szias.  vi,  16, 

Praef.  Contr.  i,  6.       ''^  Praef.  Contr.  vii,  4.      -^'■'Cf.  Praef.  Contr.  i,  21, 
Cf.  Contr.  i,  2,  22  sq.  ;    Pracf.  Contr.  iii,  7  ;   Pracf.  Contr.  vii,  359. 
Cf.  Praef.  Conir.  ii,  1  ;  Praef.  Contr.  iv,  7  ;   Contr.  ix,  2,  28. 
Cf.  Praef.  Contr.  ii,  1.  -6''Cf.  Praef.  Contr.  iii,  7. 

Cf.  Pracf.  Contr.  vii,  i  ""''"^  Praef.  Contr.  Vu,  7. 

Cf.  J'raef.  Contr.  i,  13  sq.  '^'^Ci.  Pracf.  Contr.  iii,  i  sq. 

Cf.  on  this  point   IJuschmann's  interesting  essay  :    Die  ^^enfants  ter- 
s   '  unter  den  Rhetor  en  dcs  Seneca. 


52 


THE    TIIKMES    TREATED    BY    THE    KLDllR    SENECA. 


good  point  is  left  unnoticed  ;  a  tt^licitous  ex{)ression  receives 
praise  even  if  it  be  senseless  ;  a  ^ood  thoiii^ht  even  if  it  be  ])()orIy 
expressed.  It  is  true  that  in  Seneca's  criticisms  censure  predomi- 
nates over  praise.  He  does  not  mince  matters;  epithets  like 
''  insanus,  stultus,  puerilis,  ineptus,  furiosus,"  are  frequent  ;  there 
is  no  lack  of  bitin^^  sarcasm  :  "Antonius  Atticus  inter  has  pueriles 
sententias  videtur  palmam  meruisse  "r''  "  Corvo  rhetori  testimo- 
nium stuporis  reddendum  est";'*'  "  Sparsum  hoc  colore  decla- 
masse  memini,  hominem  inter  scholasticos  sanum,  inter  sanos 
scholasticum."-"'  On  Seneca's  attitude  toward  the  Greek  rhetori- 
cians we  have  already  spoken.  He  was  i)y  no  means,  however, 
a  petty,  morose  pedant  and  scold;  he  is  thoroui^hly  genial  and 
has  no  idea  of  puttino^  the  fetters  of  rii^id  rules  upon  rhetoric  : 
*'  Nee  sum  ex  iudicibus  severissimis,  qui  omnia  ad  exactam 
regulam  derigam :  multa  donanda  ingeniis  puto  ;  sed  donanda 
vitia  non  portenta  sunt."""  And  what  some  of  the  rhetors  accom- 
plished in  absurdity  and  perversion  of  truth  and  good  taste  was 
"  portentous  "  indeed.  To  hear  or  read  these  puerilities  was  a 
different  thing  from  slowly  and  carefully  writing  them  down, — a 
task  to  try  the  patience  even  of  so  grave  and  dignified  a  man  as 
Seneca  shows  himst^lf  to  have  been.  This  same  Seneca  who 
yielding  to  the  request  of  his  sons,  undertook  the  task  with 
pleasure  and  enthusiasm,  expresses  toward  the  end  utter  weari- 
ness and  disgust:  "  F'ateor  vobis,"  he  addresses  his  sons,  *' iam 
res  taedio  est.  Primo  adsilui  velut  optimam  vitae  meae  partem 
mihi  reducturus  :  deinde  iam  me  pudet  tamquam  din  non   seriam 


rem  agam. 


"2Ty 


If  an  estimate  of  Seneca's  mental  attainments  is  to  be  drawn 
from  his  extant  rhetorical  writings,  it  may  be  said  that  there  is 
nothing  in  them  to  show  a  man  of  extraordinary  capacity.  The 
finesse  and  acumen  of  Dionysius  Halic.irnassus  or  Ouintilian  are 
lacking  in  him.  Still  his  judgment,  if  not  always  fine,  is  sound. 
This  is  the  more  admirable  when  we  consider  that  he  passed  a 
great  portion  of  his  time  while  at  Rome  in  an  artificial  and  narrow- 
ing sphere.  His  style  by  its  clearness  and  siniplicity  reminds 
us  of  the  golden  age  of  Latin  diction.  His  place  in  Latin  liter- 
ature is  that  of  the  standard  authority  on  the  spirit  and 
tendency  of  the  art  of  rhetoric  at  the   beginning    ot  the  imperial 


reirime. 


■"^Suas.u,  i6.        ^■''^Ih'ci.  21.  ■''•  Co/ifr.   j,  7,  15.        '' /'rr.tf.  C'ufr.  x,  10. 

'-''■''  Praef.  Coitr.  x,   i  ;    cf.  Koerber,  Uc'er   den    hh.t.  .SV;;.,  pp.  59  ^q. 


k 


f^ 


v*^ 


*.  A 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA 


II.— Manuscripts  and  Editions. 


':^1^ 


A  full  description  of  the  various  MSS.  and  editions  is  given  by 
H.  J.  Miiller  in  the  Preface  to  his  edition  (1887)  of  the  elder 
Seneca.     The  leadmg  facts  are  briefly  summarized  below. 

I.   Maniiscripis. 

The  MSS.  ot  Seneca's  writings  divide  themselves  into  two 
classes, —  ist.  those  of  the  original  work  of  Seneca  as  far  as  it  is 
extant,  /.  r.  the  Controversiae  Books  i,  ii,  vii,  ix  and  x  exclusive 
of  the  Prefaces  to  books  i  and  ii,  and  the  seven  Suasoriae ;  2nd, 
those  containing  the  Excerpts  of  books  i,  ii,  iii,  iv,  vii  and  x. 

\sf  AfSS.  0/  the  Controversiae  and  Suasoriae. —  i.  Codex  Ant- 
verpiensis  (A),  parchment,  loth  century,  corrected  probably  in 
1 6th.     Lacunae  in  Contr.  ii,  5  ;  ix,  2  ;  Suas.  ii,  7. 

2.  Codex  Bruxellensis  (B),  formerly  Cusanus,  parchment,  loth 
century,  corrected  in  i6th.  Lacuna  in  Contr.  x,  5.  Written  by  two 
hands. 

3.  Codex  Vaticanus  (V),  parchment,  written  toward  the  end  of 
the  roth  century  and  shortly  afterward  corrected  by  another 
hand,  again  slightly  worked  over  in  the  15th  century. 

All  three  of  these  codices  show  by  their  agreement  in  many 
corrections  and  omissions,  as  well  as  in  the  manner  of  writing 
the  Greek  words,  that  they  go  back  to  a  common  archetype  (C), 
but  they  were  derived  iVom  two  different  copies  of  it :  viz.  A  and 
B,  which  are  closely  akin  to  one  another,  from  one,  and  V  from 
the  other. 

As  regards  the  critical  value  of  A,  B  and  V,  A  and  B  are  more 
faithful  to  the  archetype  and  therefore  of  greater  authority, 
while  V  is  characterized  by  many  interpolations  of  a  talented  and 
learned  emendator.  Bursian  gives  B  the  preference  over  A  ,'^"'  while 
H.J.  Miiller  and  Konitzer'"  and  Kiessling^'^  accord  equal  merit 
to  both.  The  corrections  of  A  and  B  came  mostly  from  editions 
and  have  therefore  no  other  critical  value  than  that  of  conjectures. 

■*'^"Cf.  Bursian's  edition,  Preface,  p.  x  :  "Nihil  tamen  isti  scribae  ex  arbi- 
trio  suo  mutaverunt,  ita  ut  codex  quamvis  corruptissimus  ubique  tamen 
veri  vestigia  nulla  interpolatione  obscurata  nobis  offerat  quibus  solis 
insistendum  est  ei  qui  auctoris  verbis  et  recenscndis  et  emendandis  pris- 
tinuin  suum  splentlorem  his  libris  reddere  conatur." 

-''  Quaat.  ifi  Sen.  patr.  ,  rit.,  pp.  4  sq. 

'^""^  Beitr.  zur  I't-.xdskrit.  Jes  RJict.  Sen.,  p.  32. 


54 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


4.  Codex  Toletanus  or  Covarruvianus  (T),  parclniunt,  co|)ied 
from  V  in  the  13111  century  an;l  corrected  iirohtl-ly  m  the  i6th. 

5.  Codex  Brib^ensis  (  Bv),  parchment,  copied  tVom  Tin  tlie  15th 
century  before  it  was  corrected.  Hoth  T  and  H\  are  therrtorelor 
critical  purposes  to  a  o-reat  extent  superseded  by  \\  from  which 
they  are  directlv  or  indirectly  derived. 

6.  Codex  Yaticanus  (v),  parchment,  15th  century,  very  small 
characters. 

7.  Codex  Bruxellensis  (D),  paper,  15th  century,  with  all  the 
Greek  omitted,  a  blank  space  beino^  left  fur  it.  Corrected  l)y  two 
hands  in  the  same  century.  It  contains  the  declamations  <^f  the 
pseudo-Quintilian,  the  Controversiae  antl  Suasoriae  of  Seneca, 
and  the  bcL^innini^  of  the  Dialo^^us  attributed  to   I^icitus. 

8.  The  lour  codices  used  by  Schott, — Covarruvianus,  Bruotnsis, 
Vaticanus  and  Aucrustodunensis.  Of  these  the  hrst  two  were 
treated  under  4  and  5  ;  the  Vaticanus  can  be  identifit  d  neither 
with  V  nor  v  mentioned  above  under  3  and  6;  the  Aucrustodu- 
nensis has  disappeared.'-"^ 

2nd  MSS.  of  the  Excerpts  of  the  Coutroi'rysiae.—  i.  Codex 
Montepessulanus  (M),  parchment,  gth  or  loiii  century,  corrected 
shortly  afterwards  by  a  second  hand  and  much  later  by  a  third. 
The  Excerpts  are  preceded  by  the  Declamations  of  the  pseudo- 
Quintilian. 

2.  Codex  Parisinus  (P)  (formerly  Colbertmus),  parchment,  13th 

century. 

3.  Codex  Parisinus  (S)  (formerly  S orbonianus),  parchment, 
13th  century.     Closes  with  the  word  "  actio  "  in  Excerpt  vi,  7. 

4.  Codex  Admontanus,  parchment,  12th  century. 

5.  Codex  Berolinensis,  parchment,  14th  century.  Contains  an 
*'  Expositio  tmtris  Nicholai  "  wdiich  is  of  importance  for  the  text- 
criticism  in  so  far  tliat  in  some  cases  Seneca's  words  can  be  more 
easily  found  out  from  the  notes  in  which  they  are  quoted  lor 
explanation  than  from  the  text  of  the  scribe. 

There   are   many  other   manuscripts    of  the    Excer{)ts.     The 

-^3Cf  Wo^^^s  De  Soi.  rhct.  auatt.  cod.  MSS,  Sc'iott,  {>.  6.  Hofig  considers 
it  very  probable  that  all  four  go  back  to  one  archetype,  p.  S,  Schott  and 
Hofig  range  them  in  respect  to  value  and  importance  in  the  following  order  : 
Covarruvianus,  Vaticanus,  Brugensis,  Augustodunensis.  They  were  all 
written  on  parchment  and  contained  the  Cireek  ;  p.  12  sq.  discusses  their 
relations  to  one  another  and  to  the  archetype. 


\ 


I  \ 


/         V 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    liV    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


.^n 


Moatepessulanus  is  by  far  the  best  of  all.  Although  carelessly 
written  by  an  ii^norant  scribe,  it  is  quite  free  from  interpolations, 
with  which  the  others  are  teeming.  According  to  HotTmann  the 
MS.  lUMst  akin  to  the  Montepessulanus  is  the  Admontanus,'** 
although  the  latter  is  neither  derived  from  nor  a  copy  of  the 
former,  the  Admontanus  being  from  a  separate  codex  which, 
however,  contained  many  corrections  and  erasures. 

2.  Editions. 

The  Excerpts  are  found  among  the  works  of  Seneca  the  philoso- 
pher, printed  at  Naples  in  1475,  reprinted  in  1478. 

Thv'  first  edition  of  the  Suasoriae  and  Controversiae  (in  this 
order),  with  the  prefaces  of  books  vii,  ix  and  x  and  some  of  the 
works  of  Seneca  the  philosopher,  was  printed  at  Venice  in  1490 
and  ai^ain  in  1492  and  1503.  In  this  edition  the  Greek  words 
are  omitted. 

The  editio  Frobeniana  was  brought  out  by  Erasmus  at  Basle 
in  15 15.  It  is  like  the  Venetian  edition  except  that  in  it  the 
Suasoriae  and  Controversiae  follow  the  Excerpts  without  the 
interposition  of  some  of  the  smaller  works  of  the  philosopher 
Seneca. 

John  Mervagen  and  Bernard  Brand  printed  an  edition  at  Basle 
in  1557  in  which  the  Controversiae  precede  the  Suasoriae.  The 
Greek  is  omitted. 

The  R(Kiian  edition  of  Muretus,  printed  in  1585,  claims  "  Com- 
plures  lacunas  quae  erant  in  controversiis,  etsi  non  omnes  (quis 
enim  hoc  mortalium  praestet?)  explevit  ex  codice  multae  aetatis 
at  fidei  de  bibliotheca  Vaticana."     The  order  of  the  books  is  the 

2®^  ( )n  the  value  of  the  MSS.  of  the  Excerpts  for  restoring  the  text  of  the 
Controversiae,  since  the  Excerpts  were  prepared  from  an  older  and  better 
codex  than  the  archetype  of  the  existing  MSS.  of  the  Controversiae  and 
Suasoriae,  and  since  they  alone  contain  the  prefaces  of  the  first  four  books 
of  the  Controversiae,  cf.  Spengel,  Gelehrtc  Afizeii^eu  der  hayrischen  Akad- 
emif  dn-  WissenscJiaftni  xlvii  (1S5S),  pp.  i-io;  Kiessling,  KJi.  Mus.  xvi 
(i8(3i).  pp.  50  sfj.  ;  Hc:tr.  znr  Texteskrit  des  KJut.  Seti.,  pp.  32  sq.  ;  Konitzer, 
Quae- St.  : >!  Sm.  f-dfr.  crit.,  p.  12;  Hoffmann,  Veher  eine  Adniont.  Pergam- 
Handu-hr.  der  E.w.dcs  i:lt.  Sen.,  p.  174.  Hoffmann  gives  a  full  description 
and  estimate  of  the  Admontanus,  based  on  a  comparison  with  the  Antver- 
piensis  and  Hruxelknsis  on  one  hand,  and  the  Montepessulanus  on  the 
other,  cf.  pp.  173.  178.  Hoffman  also  thinks  that  the  Parisinus  and  Sor- 
bonianuN  came  from  the  same  source  as  the  Admontanus,  cf.  p.  178. 


? 


i6 


THE    TIIKMES    TRKATi:i)    P.V    Till:    KL1)1:r    Sl'MLCA, 


same  as  in  the  Hervai^ian  edition,  hut  the  Excerpts  of  l)ooks  i.  ii, 
vii,  ix  and  x  are  (initted. 

The  editions  thus  far  mentioned  attrihuted  tlie  Controversiae 
and  Siiasoriae  to  Seneca  the  i)hilosopher,  and  accorchn^ly  iomed 
them  to  his  worics.  The  first  to  edit  them  separateh-  was 
Nicolaus  Fahtr  at  Paris  in  1587.  The  Controversiae  comt'  first. 
then  the  Suasoriae,  and  then  the  Excer|)ts  f  Declamations). 

Andreas  Schott  of  Heidelber^  in  1603.  Of  this  there  arc 
several  reprints,  "  cumuberioribus  notiset  coniecturis  Nic.  Fahri, 
Andr.  Schotti,  I.  Gruteri,  Fr.  Jureti,  1.  Lipsii,  lo.  IVtrcii.  Fcr. 
Rinciani,  I.  Opsoroei."  As  stated  above,  this  edition  was  Ijascd 
on  the  four  codices, — Toletanus  (Covarruvianus),  Hrm^msis, 
Vaticanus,  and  Au^^ustodunensis,  the  preference  <^ivcn  in  the 
first.  . 

J.  F.  Grontn-ius  at  Lyons  in  1649.  The  corrections  of  Tole- 
tanus (t),  which  Schott  incorporated  into  his  edition,  p.issed  mto 
that  of  Gronovius  and  thence  into  the  Vul^-ate  or  Elzevir  edition 
ot  1672.  This  contains  the  valuable  prefices.  notes,  ami  in-emons 
emendations  of  Ivaber,  Schott,  Gronovius,  and  especiallv  of 
Johannes  Schulting. 

Conrad  Bursian,  Leipzio^,  1857,  based  on  the  Antverj»iensi>  and 
Bruxellensis  (preference  <^Mven  to  the  latter;.  The  Vaticar.us  was 
not  known  to  Bursian. 

Adolph  Kiesslin^^  Leipzior,  1872.  Kiesslinq  made  u-e  <.f  the 
critical  material  accumulated  since  Bursian's  edition. 

FI.  J.  Miiller,  Vienna,  Prague  and  Leii)zig,  1887. 


V 


/ 


1        -% 


;•         V 


l| 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA, 


0/ 


PART  IIL-THEMES  OF  THE  SUASORIAE  AND 

CONTROVERSIAE. 

I. — The  sources. 

From  what  has  been  said  in  Parts  I  and  II  in  regard  to  the 
subjects  treated  by  the  writers  of  Suasoriae  it  is  apparent  that 
the  inquirer  as  to  the  sources  whence  these  subjects  were  drawn, 
is  conlronted  by  a  vagueness  and  confusion  in  the  material  with 
which  he  has  to  deal,  which  make  detinite  statements  difficult  in 
most  cases  and  in  many  impossible.  Two  facts  may  be  premised 
with  certainty. 

First:  that  at  the  period  of  Seneca  the  Elder  a  great  amount 
of  rhetorical  material  had  accumulated  "  in  stock,"  as  it  were, 
for  the  free  use  of  the  declaimers.  We  find  traces  of  this  accu- 
mulation from  the  time  of  Sulla,  when  the  productions  of  the 
rhetoricians  seem  to  have  first  taken  on  a  Roman  coloring. 
With  the  opening  of  schools  of  rhetoric  in  Latin,  modelled  on  the 
Greek,  there  would  naturally  arise  a  Latin  paraphrasing  of  the 
topics  on  which  the  teachers  of  the  Greek  schools  had  so  long 
employed  their  skill.  The  Suasoriae,  owing  to  their  simpler 
nature,  seem  to  have  reached  a  complete  development  earlier 
than  the  Controversiae.  Thus  we  find  in  Ad  Hereniimvi  iii,  2,  2 
as  a  subject  of  deliberation,  whether  "  Karthago  tollenda  an  re- 
liquenda  videatur  "  ;"•  "  ut  si  Hannibal  consulat  cum  ex  Italia  Kar- 
thaginem  arcessitur,  in  Italia  remaneat  an  domum  redeat  an  in 
Aegyptum  profectus  occupet  Alexandriam  ";  "  ut  si  deliberet 
senatus  captivos  ab  hostibus  redimat  an  non  "  ;-""'  "  ut  si  deliberet 
senatus  (bello  Italico)  solvatne  legibus  Scipionem  ut  eum  liceat 
ante  tempus  consulem  fieri  ";  '*  ut  si  deliberet  senatus  bello  Italico, 
sociis  civitatem  det  an  non  "  ;  iii,  5,  8  ;  "qui  a  Poeno  circumsessi 
deliberant,  quid  agant.'"''     All  these  subjects  may  be  placed  as 

^■'■*  Cf.  Cicero,  Dc  inv.\,%,  11  :  "  si  Karthaginem  relinquerimus  incolumeir. 
num  (juid  .sit  incomrnodi  ad  rem  publicani  preventurum  "  ;  and  ;7'/i/.  12,  17: 
"  utrum  Karthago  diruatur  an  Karthaginensibus  reddatur  an  eo  colonia  de- 
ducat  ur." 

'-"''^Cf.  Cicero,  Dc  Orat.  iii,  28,  109  :  "  placeatne  a  Karthaginensibus  cap- 
tivos nostros  redditis  suis  recuperari  ?" 

■"' Cf.  Cicero, /^tw;/z'.  ii,  ^7,  171:  "necesse  est  Casilinenses  se  dedere 
Hannibali  .  .  .  nisi  si  nialunt  fame  perire  .  .  .  sive  velint  Casihnenses  se 
dedere  sive  famem  perpeti  atque  ita  perire,  necesse  est  Casilinura  venire  in 
Hannibalis  potestatem.  ' 


58 


THE    TIIEMF.S    TREATED    P.V    THE    ELDER    SEXEC  \. 


parallels  to  those  of  the  seven  extant  Suasoriat^*  of  Seneca.  In  .-Id 
Hereyinhcm  i,  3,  5  we  find  as  the  snhject  of  a  declamation  ''  pro  viro 
forti  contra  parricidani  "  ;  in  i,  14,  24  arc  found  two  subjects  of 
Controversiae.  viz.  '"  ut  ille,  qui  de  eo  servo  qui  dominum  occi- 
derat,  supplicium  sunipsit,  cui  trater  esset,  antrquani  tabulas  testa- 
menti  aperuit,  ciim  is  servus  testamento  manumissus  esset  "  ;  "  ut 
ille.  quid  ad  diem  commeatus  non  venit.  quod  aquae  interclusis- 
sent  "  ;  in  i,  15,  25  is  found  another,  viz.  "ut  Orestes,  cum  se 
detendit  in  matrem  conferens  crimen."  These  three  subjects  seem 
to  have  been  taken  from  the  Greek  rhetoricians.-"  Many  other  sub- 
jects of  Controversiae  are  found  in  Ad  Ilcrcnnhim.  :is  i,  1 3,  23  on  the 
conflict  of  four  difterent  laws  in  the  case  of  Malleolus  the  matricide, 
viz.  ''Si  furiosus  existet,  ad;^natum  j^entiliumque  in  eo  pccuni- 
aque  eius  potestas  esto  "  ;  "  Qui  })arentem  necasse  iudicatus  (  rit, 
ut  is  obvolutus  et  obligatus  corio  devehatur  in  prolluentem." 
"Paterfamilias  uti  super  familia  ])ecuniave  sua  les^averit,  ita  ius 
esto."  "  Si  paterfamilias  intestatus  n^^oritur,  tamilia  pecuniaque 
eius  adi^natum  orentiliumque  esto."-"'  Ad  IlertniiinDi  i,  14,  24: 
*' ut  Caepio  ad  tribunos  plebis  de  exercitus  amissione."  ""  The 
fourth  book  o(  Ad  Ilcrcnnium  is  full  of  extracts  from  Controver- 
siae, while  Irom  Cicero's  Dc  ini-oii'uvic  a  lon^  list  mi^^ht  be  made 
out,  the  subject-matter  bein^  taken  from  both  Rom.m  and  Greek 
history.     As  examples  of  the  tormer  compare  Cicero,    Dc  inv.   i, 

30,  48:  ''  velut  [Horatii  factum  a  populoapprobatum.  cpiod  occid;t 
sororem,  cum  ilhi  devictum  Curiatium  hostem  detleret  ;  velut] 
Gracchi  patris  factum  ....";  ii,  26,  78,  also  on  thekillinii  o!  his  sis- 
ter by  Horatius.  As  examples  trom  Greek  historv  :  i,  30.  47  :  "  nam 
si  Rhodiis  turpe  non  est  portorium  locare.  ne  Hermocreonti  quidem 
turpe  est  conducere "  ;  ii,  23,  69:  "cum  Thebani  Lacedaemo- 
nios  bello  superavissent  et  fere  most  est  Graiis,  cum  inter  se 
bellum  i^essissent,  ut  ei,  qui  vicissent  tropaeum  aliquod  in  fmibus 

-^~Cf.  Quintilian,   hist.  Oral,  vii,  4,  14  sq.  ;   Cicero,   Dc  mi.   i,  13,  iS  ;     ii, 

31,  96  ;   nuintilian,  /.  <,   4,  S, 

-*^^Cf.  Cicero,  Dc  inv.  ii,  50,  14S,  where  the  first,  third  and  fourtli  laws 
stated  above  are  mentioned  and  the  |)uni>hnient  prescribeci  bv  the  vcroiul 
is  said  to  have  been  inflicted,  the  name  of  the  criminal  however  not  i>t,- ntz; 
given.  The  point  at  issue  is  the  same  in  both  cases,  viz.  whethei  the 
guilty  man  had  or  had  not  the  right  to  make  a  will.  For  other  later  cases 
ot  the  crossing  of  laws  cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ix,  13;  <Juintilian,  Ddl.  359; 
Calpur.  Flaccus,  Dccl.  14  ;    15. 

-^Cf.  Cicero,  Dc  orat.  ii,  2S,  124:  '' illam  Norbar.i  setlitionein  e.\  luctu 
civium  et  ex  Caepionis  odio,  qui  exercitum  amiserat  ..." 


V 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    I!V    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


59 


/ 


I 


/    \f\ 


( 


^ 


statuerent  victoriae  modo  in  praesentiam  declarandae  causa,  non 
ut  in  perpetuum  belli  memoria  maneret  aeneum  statuerunt  tro- 
paeum. Accusantur  apud  Amphictyonas,  id  est  apud  commune 
Graeciae  consilium."  At  this  period  the  subjects  treated  still 
appe  ir  to  be  such  as  had  some  sort  of  basis  in  mythology  or 
hist'-ry.  or  some  possible  connection  with  the  facts  of  real  life. 
But  the  development  toward  the  unreal  and  impossible  seems  to 
h  ivc  ".gained  rapid  headway,  for  we  find  Tiberius  pro[)Ounding  to 
the  rhetoricians  such  questions  as  "Who  w-as  the  mother  of 
Hecuba  i^  "  "  What  sonc>^s  did  the  Sirens  sing?  "-''^  It  seems  prob- 
able that  this  occurred  durin^y  Tiberius's  voluntary  exile  at 
Rhodes,  as  we  know  that  while  there  he  w^as  in  the  habit  of 
attendin;^  the  rhetorical  schools.  At  this  time,  wdiich  nearly 
coincides  with  that  of  the  elder  Seneca's  second  coming  to  Rome, 
both  the  accumulation  of  subjects  for  declamation  and  their 
development  in  artificiality  and  absurdity  seem  to  have  been 
well-nioh  complete. 

The  second  fact  which  may  be  definitely  asserted  in  connection 
with  the  subjects  employed  by  the  declaimers,  is  that  from  this 
vast  i^eneral  fund  of  fact  and  fantasy,  the  rhetoricians  appropriated 
whatever  portions  suited  their  purpose,  changing  and  arranging 
at  will,  without  a  thought  of  the  ultimate  originals  and  without 
concern  tor  their  accurate  reproduction.  The  subjects  of  Seneca's 
Controversiae  as  also  of  the  Declamations  of  the  pseudo-Quin- 
tilian  and  Calpurnius  Flaccus,  by  their  very  nature  exclude  the 
possibility  of  an  exact  and  indubitable  tracing  to  their  origin.  In 
their  extant  form  and  conception,  at  least,  they  were  born  in  the 
exuberant  fancy  ot  the  rhetoricians,  when  and  by  whose  agency  in 
each  c.ise  it  is  now  impossible  to  ascertain.  A  great  many  of  the 
themes  must  undoubtedly  have  come  to  the  Latin  rhetorical 
schools  from  the  Greek,  as  is  evident  from  the  political  and 
social  conditions  they  presuppose  ;  this  will  be  shown  below  in 
individual  instances  by  reference  to  the  rhetorical  writings  o^ 
Hermogenes.  As  has  been  said  above,  and  as  will  be  proved  by  a 
comparison  of  Seneca's  Controversiae  with  the  Declamationes  of 
the  pseudo-Quintilian  and  Calpurnius  Flaccus,  many  of  the  sub- 
jects had  l)ecome  stereotyped  as  school  exercises,  passing  from 
one  rhetorician  to  another  and  from  one  school  to  another  through 
the  various  periods  and  phases  of  rhetorical  study.    When  once  a 


291 


Cf.  Suetonius,  77/'.  c.  70. 


6o 


THE    THEMES    TKi-AIi;!)    i;V     ITIE    KI.DF.R    SKXKCA. 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    EEUER    SENECA. 


6i 


stock  of  subjects  had  accumulated,  it  required  but  little  imagina- 
tion to  form  new  ones  by  sh\i4htly  varying;   the  old.     Thus  one  of 
the  themes  most  hiohly  favored  in  the  schools  seems  to  have  been 
the  disinheritincr  of  a  son-"-'  .     Now  a  fatlur  may  disinlu  rit  a  son 
for  marryincr  against  his  will,  for  refusing   to  slay  his  adulterous 
mother,  for  declinino;  to  be  adopted  by  a  rich  man.  for  killing  his 
adulterous    brother,    etc.       The    same    variety    of    treatment    is 
possible  with  many  other  subjects  as  a  glance  at  euher  Seneca  or 
the  pseudo-Quintilian  will   show.     The  inthK-nce  of  analogy  also 
must   have  been   very  o^reat   in   this   constant  and   kaleidoscopic 
rearrangement    of  elements    already    at    hand.     In    tracing    the 
sources  of  the  themes  treated  by  Seneca,  as   well  as  ot  individu.il 
dicta  in  his  writings,  it  is  necessary  to  guard  continually  against 
assuming  as  their  /07iU\^  passages  in  earlier  classical  writers  which, 
although  strikingly  similar,  are  themselves  also  derived  trom   a 
common  original.     Coincidence  must  not  be  mistaken  tor  deriva- 
tion.    These  /o?i/6's  are  in  many  cases  utterly  lost  or  hopelessly 
obscured,  and  one  might  search  for  them  in  vain  througliout  the 
whole  extent  of  pre-Augustan  classical  literature.     No  al)solute 
rule  of  discrimination  can  be  laid  down.     The  following  pages  are 
an  effort  to  classify  the  themes  treated  by  the  elder  Seneca  and 
to  give  what  has  been  ascertained  about  the  origin  of  surh  as  may 
with  reasonable  certainty  be  traced  to  a  definite  source.     The  work 
is  largely  tentative  but  will  not  be  without  value  if  it  shali  interest 
others  to  search  lor  additional  facts  along  the  same  lines.*''^ 

S^rasoria  i. 

Alexander  deliberates  whether  he  shall  cross  the  ocean. 

The  theme  and  the  discussion  in  the  Divisio,  in  regard  to 
addressing  a  ruler,  were  probably  suggested  by  the  speech  of  the 
philosopher  Anaxarchus,  in  which  he  proposed,  after  the  subjuga- 
tion of  Asia  by  Alexander,  that  the  latter  should  be  deified  and 
receive  divine  homage  in  the  manner  of  the  Persian  kings. 
Callisthenes  as  a  defender  of  Greek  manliness  protested  agamst 

■'»- In  the  pseudo-Quintilian  there  are  22  cases  of  disinheritance;  for 
Seneca  cf.  the  classification  of  subjects  below. 

-••^•^Cf.  Dirksen,  Ueber  die  durch  die  griechischen  und  lateinischcn  Rhe- 
toren  angewendete  Methode  der  Auswahi  und  Benutzung  von  r.ei^pulen 
romisch-rechtlichen  Inhalts.  Af'/uiud/un^c;!  der  K,>ii^l:chni  Akadcmtr  ,/,,- 
Wissensckaften.      Berlin,  1847,  i,  pp.  4S-77. 


s,     i 


'  if 


this  fulsome  adulation  but  met  with  a  tragic  end.^'"  In  Contr.  vii, 
7,19  Seneca  mentions  that  when  this  Suasoria  was  delivered  on  a 
certain  occasion,  in  the  rhetorical  school,  a  voice  exclaimed: 
'■  Qiiousque  invicte,"  which  of  course  recalls  Cicero's  first  oration 
against  Cataline.  The  subject  of  this  suasoria  seems  moreover  to 
have  been  one  of  the  stock  topics  of  the  schools,  as  it  is  among 
those  enumerated  by  Quintilian  as  current  among  the  rhetori- 
cians."'*''  The  theme  is,  however,  based  on  an  historical  fact.^'"**^ 

Siiasoria  ii. 

Tiie  three  hundred  Lacedaemonians  sent  against  Xerxes,  when 
the  three  hundred  sent  from  all  Greece  have  fled,  deliberate 
whether  they  themselves  shall  flee. 

The  historical  kernel  of  this  second  Suasoria  is  the  assembly  of 
the  several  Greek  contingents  at  Thermopylae  and  their  subse- 
quent dismissal  by  Leonidas,  King  of  the  Spartans.""'  On  the 
question  of  "  trecenti  "  vs.  "  treceni  "  Bursian  remarks  :  "  Cum 
per  totam  suasoriam  (excepting  ^5  5)  semper  de  *  trecentis  '  sermo 
fiat  ....  rhetor  finxisse  statuendus  est  e  singulis  Graecis  urbibus 
quotquot  viribus  pollebant,  trecenos  milites  Spartanis  auxilio 
missos  fuisse,  quod  non  magis  contra  historiae  fidem  peccat  quam 
quae  de  Cimone,  Phidia,  Parrhasio,  Popillio,  aliis  referuntur."  As 
may  l)e  seen  from  the  account  of  Herodotus  the  other  Greeks  did 
not  flee  but  were  dismissed  by  Leonidas."''' 

■ 

Suasoria  iii. 

Agamemnon  deliberates  whether  he  shall  immolate  Iphigenia, 
since  Calchas  asserts  that  otherwise  the  voyage  cannot  take 
place. 

The  theme  of  this  Suasoria  was  well  known  from  the  tragedians, 
and  therefore  it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  the  rhetoricians  made 
use  of  such  a  tavorite  subject.  In  fact,  it  seems  to  have  been  one 
of  those  most  [popular  in  the  schools.  Compare  Petronius,  i,  6  : 
"  Ingens  scholasticorum  turba  in  porticum  venit,  ut  apparebat,  ab 

- "' Cf.  Cuitius,  viii,  1,  45;  v,  13;  Arrian,  iv,  9,  4;  Plutarch,  Alex,  cc. 
50  sq. 

'   Cf.  I)ist.  C^ri;/.  iii,  8,  lO;    vii,  4,  2. 

■•  "^  Cf.  Curtius,  ix,  <}  :  "  Ptrvicax  cupido  incessit  (sc.  Alexandrum)  visendi 
Occanuin  adeundique  terminos  mundi." 

^^"  Cf.  Herodotus,  vii,  220  sq. 

'-'     Cf.  also  Cornelius  Nepos,  Thernist,  3. 


62 


THE    TIimfES    TREATED    V.\ 


U 


ELDER    SENECA. 


extemporabili  dechiinatione  nescio  cuius,  (|ui  Aoanu mnomV  sua- 
soriam  exceperat ":  cL  also  Quinlilian,  hist.  Orat.  ii.  i-  r -. 
Lucretius  considered  it  worthy  of  some  {)atheiic-  \erses  :  •'  Kt 
raoestum  simui  ante  aras  adstare  j)arenteni  Sensit  vi  lumc  propter 
ferrum  celare  ministros,  Adspectuque  suo  lacrinias  ettundare 
civis.     Muta  metu  terram  genibus  submissa  petebat."  ■*''' 

Suasoria  iv. 
Alexander  the  Great  deliberates  whether  he  shall  fiitrr  Ikibylon 
when  by  the  response  of  the  augur  he  had  been  forewarned  of 
danger. 

The  theme  of  this  Suasoria  is  taken  from  history.  Compare 
Arrian,  vii,  l6,  5  :  "  A/i^auditoq  dk  wq  rov  Tiypr-a.  -itzainr,  ^h;  'r 
rrrf.-aT'.u  ,p,^^3r,  IhvrMn.  i:z\  Ba^ulO.y.o'^  hrahna  izt>yy/i.ou(Tt>  a>>-ul 
\u./jj<VAiy,  <>[  Anymt  xa:  d-ayayuyrzq  a-n  t(7j>  ira-fxo-^  idiu>7<>  i-inyily 
rryj  l-\  Uafiohh'.o^  ihin'.;,  /j'ry:,,,  y„.n  yzyn-.tyn^'.  ociui;  ix  nrj  Ueitv 
zoo  IW^Xoo  !>.y^  -//-;-  ayannb  i>i  ehat  zry^  -dnann.  -;y  ,-  llayiokar^a  t>  - (Z 
Ti>r-:  roi/  Sk    d-nxir>a.rr>h/.:    aozoi^    ^-''y"'  [~"'\\    i'.'>n'.-:nr   (>»o:  :  '  IA/>r;c  o' 

'  !j.r^  -in,:;  nnann.-  dcnnrr,  aozuz  /^r/)-  77^>  (7Z{><iT'.<v,  T'/,'  ry  :r//<'-j-^/> 
dyor.  -a;,uM,l,-  aAAa  .K-zniz/Mr^  -uuz  ho  fiau.n,  '  "  Compare  also 
Pompeius  Trogus,  P^pitome  of  Justinus.  Philippicarum  xii. 

Suasoria  v. 
The    Athenians    deliberate    whether    they    shall    remove  their 
Persian  trophies,   since    Xerxes  threatens  10  return  unless  they 
do  so. 

The  only  element  of  reality  in  the  subject  of  this  Suasoria  is 
the  reference  to  the  custom  of  i)reserving  trophies  taken  from 
defeated  foes. 

Sua  Sen  id  vi. 

Cicero  deliberates  whether  he  shall  implore  mercy  from  Antony. 

The  fictitious  argument  of  this  Suasoria  was  suggested  by  the 
enmity  between  Cicero  and  M.  Antonius,  wliich  led  to  the  violent 
death  of  the  former.  Moreover  this  theme  and  that  of  the  next 
Suasoria  also,  seem  to  have  belonged  to  the  stock  subjects  of  the 
rhetorical  schools.'""  It  may  be  said  that  the  signal  success  of 
Cicero's  Hfe  and  its  tragic  end  were  favorite  t(»})ics  with  tlie  lat(  r 
Roman  writers  in  oencral."'^^ 


'.",1:1 


Dc  rer.  nat.  i,  95  sq.  ^^"^'Ct;  Ouintilian,  his!.  Orat.  iii.  S.  46. 

■^"'  Cf.  Mornvvski,  De  r/ict.   'a.'.,  pj).  lOs.j. 


I 


i 


'     f 


Till:    JilEMES    TREATED    UV    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


6 


0 


Suasoria  vii. 

Cicero  deliberates  whether  he  shall  burn  his  own  writings,  since 
Antony  promised  him  security  if  he  should  do  so. 

On  the  theme  of  the  seventh  and  last  Suasoria  compare  what 
was  said  above  in  regard  to  the  sixth.  Compare  also  Suas.  vi, 
14:  "Solent  enim  scholastici  declamitare:  deliberat  Cicero  an 
salutem  promittente  Antonio  orationes  suas  comburat.  Haec 
inepte  ficta  cuilibet  videri  potest." 

Coniroversia  i,  i. 
Patruus  abdicans. — Liberi  parentes  alant  aut  vinciantur. 

Two  brothers,  one  of  whom  had  a  son,  disagreed.  When  the 
uncie  became  needy  the  nephew  against  the  prohibition  of  his 
father  supported  him.  Being  disinherited  by  his  father  for  this, 
he  was  silent.  He  was  adopted  by  the  uncle  who  by  receiving 
an  inheritance  became  rich.  Then  the  younp  man's  father  be^ran 
to  sutTer  want  and  was  supported  by  his  son  against  the  prohibi- 
tion ot  the  uncle,  who  thereupon  disinherited  the  young  man. 

The  subjects  of  the  support  of  the  aged,  and  disinheritance  were 
two  of  the  revelling  grounds  of  the  declaimers,  cf.  Contr.  iii,  19; 
vii,  4  ;  Ouintilian,  Decl.  maj.,  5;  Quintilian,  hist.  Orai.  v,  10,  16 
and  vii,  6,  5. 

Coiitrovcrsia  i,  3. 
Incesta  saxo  deiciatur. 

A  priestess,  accused  of  incest,  before  she  was  hurled  from  the 
rock  invoked  Vesta.  She  remained  alive  and  was  demanded 
again  tor  a  repetition  of  the  penalty. 

This  is  a  fictitious  law  of  the  schools,  for  by  Roman  law  an 
incestuous  i)riestess  was  buried  alive.  The  penalty  imagined  by 
the  rhetoricians  may  have  had  its  origin  in  a  confusion  of  the  w^ell- 
knovvn  story  of  Sappho's  precipitating  herself  from  a  rock  on 
account  of  misfortune  in  love,  and  the  fact  that  traitors  in  the  early 
time  at  Rome  were  thrown  down  from  the  Farpeian  Rock.  In 
273  B.  C.  a  Vestal  was  hanged.'"' 

Contr  over  sia  i,  4. 
Fort  is  sine  manibus. 

A  brave  man,  who  had  lost  both  hands  in  war,  caught  his  wife 
and  her  paramour  in  Jiagrajitc  and  ordered  his  son  to  kill  them. 

•^°-Cf.  Orosius,  iv,  5,  9. 


64 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


u  hfr('i]|)()n 


The  young  man  refused,  and  the  adulterer  escapee 
the  son  is  disinherited. 

This  theme  i.^  very  similar  to  tliat  of  QuintiHan.  DecL  330. 
It  was  very  likely  suggested  per  contrarium  b\  tlie  story  of 
Orestes.'"' 

Controvcrsia  i,  5. 
Raf^tor  duarum. 

A  man  raped  two  maidens  m  tiie  same  nieht  ;  one  demanded 
his  death,  the  other  marriage. 

This  seems  to  have  l)een  af-ivoritc  sul)ic(^t  witii  botli  tlie  Romrm 
and  Greek  rhetoricians,  and  was  in  all  probability  transferred 
irom  the  latter  to  the  Roman  schools.  Ii  is  introchiecd  by 
Hermogenes  in  his  ''  r.^pi  rcSv  <Tra<r£wv,  "'"^  and  is  the  ihcnu,  m  a 
more  developed  form,  with  a  sequel  of  Calpurnii's  Flacrus. 
Dec  I.  4(). 

Controversia  i,  6. 

Archipiratae  ti'ia. 

.  A  man  captured  by  pirates  v.r  -te  to  his  father  in  regai  d  to  a 
ransom  but  was  not  ransomed.  The  daughter  of  the  pirat(  -(  iiief 
compelled  the  captive  to  swear  tiiat  lie  would  many  her  ii  he 
were  treed.  He  did  so,  and  tiiereupon  tiie  daughter  ](^ft  her  father 
and  toliowed  the  youtii.  He  returned  to  his  father  ar.d  married 
her.  His  father  afterward  commanded  Inm  to  divorce  the  })irate's 
daughter  and  marrv  a  certain  ^^xv^vA\\.  When  he  reliLM.d,  his 
father  disinherited  h:m. 

For  the  introduction  of  the  orphan-  reference  may  be  made  to 
the  Attic  law  quoted  in  Terence,  J'hormio  125,  which  compelled 
orphans  to  marrv  then"  next  of  kin,  and  also  tn.ide  it  ohb-aturv 
on  the  latter  to  recei\e  them  as  wives.  A  somewhat  similar  sub- 
lect  is  found  in  (  )uintilian.  Dci/.  -.-(). 

Controversia  ii,  5. 

Torta  a  tyranno  pro  marito. 

A  wite  was  tortured  by  a  tyrana  in  ordei"  to  obtain  frr»m  her 
inlormation  as  to  the  complicity  m  a  plot  ol  her  lu!>iMnd.  She 
could  not  be  torced  to  tell.  AUerward  the  husband  killed  the 
tyrant  and  divorced  Ins  wile  on  the  charge  of  barrenness,  as  she 
had  borne  him  no  children  m  a  period  of  five  year>.  She  bued  him 
for  ingratitude. 


I 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


6q 


I  his  law  {Dioyaii  actio),  like  so  many  made  use  of  in  the 
declamations,  was  an  Attic  one.'*^^'  A  similar  case  of  iniusti  rc- 
pudii  ir.  treated  in  Quintilian,  Decl.  251.  only  that  in  this  latter 
case  the  wite  wa>  raped  and  demanded  marriage  instead  of  the 
death  of  the  ravisher.  The  subject  of  wite  and  tyrant  is  also 
inliuduced  b}-  Hermogenes,  ''  '-i,\  -dr.  azamur.^  ""'•"■'  in  the  follow- 
ing form  :  A  wife  showed  her  husband  the  way  to  a  tyrant,  a 
secret  which  no  one  else  had  been  able  to  discover.  The  husband 
killed  the  tyrant  and  then  accused  his  wife  of  adultery  with  him. 

Controversia  iv,  2. 
Sacerdos  integer  sit. 

The  Pontifcx  L.  Caecilius  Metellus  lost  his  eyesight  while 
rescuing  the  i\iiLidiiu:n  irom  tlie  burning  temple  of  Vesta.  There- 
upon the  priesthood  was  denied  him. 

Thi>  theme  is  taken  from  history  ;  the  occurrence  took  place 
B.  C.  24r.^«' 

Controversia  iv,  5. 
Priviqnns  medicus. 

A  man  disinherited  his  son.  The  latter  studied  medicine,  and 
wlivn  hi-  t.ither  fell  ill  and  was  given  up  by  the  other  physicians, 
restored  him  to  health.  I  ie  was  thereupon  restored  to  his  father's 
favor.  His  step-mother  having  fallen  ill  was  also  des|)aired  of  by 
the  physicians.  Tlu-  lather  asked  the  son  to  cure  her  and  upon 
his  refusal  disiPihented  him. 

Thir.  theme  seems  to  be  evidently  from  the  Greek  as  it  is  used 


by  Lucian  in  the  **  aiznxr^purzoiiVMK; 


'»  308 


30-^  Cf.  Quintilian .  hist.  Orat.  iii,  11,  4  sq. 
^•^^Cf.  S  pen  gel,  A''/."/.  Grace,  ii,  171. 


Controversia  v,  5. 
The  well  kn  ).\n  story  o!'  Parrhasius  and  the  captive. 

Controversia  \\  6. 

Raptus  in  veste  muliebri.— Lex  :  Impudicus  contion(  {irohibeatur. 

A   lair    youtli   made    a   wager   that    he    would    walk    m  public 

dressed  in  female  auire.    1 1-  did  so,  and  was  raped  by  ten  youths. 

He  brought  action  against  tliem  on  a  charge  of  violence  and  they 

^  Cf.  Valerius  Maximus,  ii,  6,  6  de  Areopago  ;   v,  3  dc  Phocione. 

•^•Spengel,  Khet.  Graec.  ii,  137. 

^'^  Cf.  Livy,  Epitome  xix. 

^""Cf.  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  vii,  2,  17. 


66 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


were  convicted.  Beii\^  excliukcl  iion]  ti.c  public  assembly 
by  the  in;ii^istrate,  the  youii^  man  br(ju;^l\t  acticn  a;<a:nht  him  f>n 
a  charge  of  insult. 

This  theme  was  not  foundeci  on  a  fict'ticns  law  (  f  (lu-  scIk^oIs 
but  on  the  Attic  code.'"'  Hermooenes  in  his  "  re/Zs  rwv  <TTd(TEw> '"'" 
uses  as  an  example  the  case  of  a  youth  who  used  cosmetics,  and 
was  thereupon  charged  with  -op^eia, 

Controversia  w  7. 

Trecenti  ab  inu)eratore  non  recejjti. — I  ex  :  Nocte  |::0!tas 
aperire  in  bello  non  liceat. 

Three  hundred  captivts  fleeino^  from  the  enemy  came  t(  the 
oates  at  nieht.  The  commander  would  not  o{)cn  to  them  and 
they  were  killed  before  the  gates.  Atter  a  victory  the  com- 
mander was  charged  with  injuring  the  state. 

This  theme  must  have  been  current  in  the  Greek  schools  also, 
as  it  is  given  by  Hermogenes  "  -ip\  zopianuz,  "  {1! 


"     V  311 


Coniroi'cnia  vi.  5. 
Iphicrates  reus.— Lex  :    Qui  vim  in  iudicio  fecerit,  capite  pnni- 

atur. 

Iphicrates,  having  been  twice  defeated  in  battle  l^y  the  king  of 
the  Thracians,  concluded  a  treaty  with  him  and  married  his 
daughter.  When  he  returned  to  Athens  and  ple;;ded  his  cause 
certain  Thracians  were  seen  about  the  court  firmed  with  knives, 
and  Iphicrates  himself,  although  a  defendaiU,  diew  his  sword. 
When  the  judges  were  calUd  upon  to  gi\c  their  opinion  they 
openly  pronounced  for  an  acquittal.  Iphicrates  was  thereup-un 
accused  of  having  used  violence  in  court. 

This  theme  appears  to  be  taken  from  history,  but  with  the  lacts 
a  good  deal  modified.  Xenophon^'  states  that  Iphicrates  carrad 
on  war  against  the  Thracians.  Cornelius  Nepos,  Jphicraic>  2.  1: 
"  Bellum  cum  Thracibus  gessit  ;  Seuthem  socium  Athemensaim 
in  regnum  restituit  ";  compare  also  Aeschinus.  --,":  -'//"/-/'£<T,5£;a?, 
27-29;  Diodorus  Siculus,  xvi.  21;  Plutarch,  Apoph..  187!); 
Aristotle,  Rhd.  ii,  23,  6  :  "  .  .  .  .  v>  lynt^na-n  7c:/--./r/,^  ---c  Ay.,,- 
zocu)>ra  £r:£ooLt£vo^  ;:  -onow.r^  ./.    T'/c  w/-^  i't  yuTjtiaai'^  '  '>•,  ca>7Xn.-n' 

2«>Cf.  Aeschines  against  Timarobus.     ^'i  Cf.  Spengcl,  K/wt.  Cr.u-  .  ii.  1..6. 
310  Cf.  Spcnoel,  AV/^/.  (;>,.yc-.  ii,  147-       ^^'^  Hellen.  iv,  8,  34  ^'j. 


a^T,r-ATFn    BY   THE   ELDER   SENECA. 
THE   THEMES    TREATED    BY 


^1 


,,,  .Tra  sT.s.,  ..  .-  ZXlZ.d  m  Quintilian,  DecL  386.^ 
pdrr^^r     The  same  topic  is  treateu 

Cont)'Oi'trsia  vi,  7. 

De.ncns  .l»i  ''1'"  ^■^'^^'*  "'"'''":;ed  t  second  wile.     When  one  of 

.,  ,„,..,  ,.vn..  '-;  -- -    :r,:."h,  the  phy.cians  .a,d  ,he 

the  young  men  svu.  .11  n..  ^^^^  father  compelled  the 

causeofhis,llnesswasulovea,.ur  ^^^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^^ 

son  at  the  sword  .  P",'°  ;"„,,,,  The  father  gave  up  h.s 
confessed  that  he  loved  h,.  "^P  ;'  "^.^  j  ,,;,,,  insanity  by  his 
^•ife    to   him  ana    thereupon  was  charge 

"'''"'  '""■  ■  ,  n,   ,lru  this  thetne  is  taken  from  the  history  of 

It  seen.s  evident   tha    t  gtratonice   to   his   s,ck    son 

Seleueus   ^^^  ^^'\^  ^   "'treated  in  Quint.lian,  Decl.  2,. 
Antiochus."     A  s.milar  case    s  tr  ^^^^^    .^   ^^^.^   ,^^^^^ 

,„d  Calpurnius  Flaccus  ^-/^  f '  ^^  ,^,  ,,,her  yields  his  wife 
ZV:  -^t:;^::-'"""-^  -ght  m  aduUery  w.h  hts 
former  wile.  Controversia  vii,  2. 

Popilius  Ciceronis  ^-^'^^^        ^^^,,,ks  made  on  Suasoriae  vi 
Compare    on  this    theme    tnc 

and  vn."'  Controversia  vii,  6. 

Demens  qui  servo  filiam  lunxit.  distresses.     The 

A  tyrant  permitted  ^^^Zr.  one  who  had  a  son 
chief  men  of  the  state  fled -d-^^^  ^,,,,,ged  their  mis- 

and  a  daughter.     While  ..11  ^  '^  ^^'^  ^,^5,  fate.     After  the 

tresses  his  slave  s,.ved  the  ''^fT/^^^^  ,he  slaves  were 
tyrant  w,.s  k.lled  and  the  f^^'^'^J^^^  ,y  his  master  who 
c^ucihed.     But  the  J^f  -J^  '^^  ^^  ^  l^.pon  the  son  charged 

gave  him  his  daughter  as  a  wuc. 

his  father  with  insanity.  ^    j^^  Volsinii,  the 

This   theme   was  -'^-^ ;;;:;.:':,:  Looming  enervated   by 
inhabitants   of  a  city   m    l-">™    ,^;j,,,ir  slaves  and  freedman. 

excessive  luxury,  --.^^-^P^;;;    ,;,  ory  by  the  rhetoricians.- 
The  tyrant  is  an  addition  made  to  the         > 

.»(■(    I'lutarch,  /'.■".•.•.-'•■'"-  =^'    '^ 

3.M-f.  ,V,so  l.ivy,  /v^/.  cxx.  ^    ^^^^^.^^_  .^_  .    ..  Amelias  Victor, 

3.6  Cf.  Valerius  .M.'.xn..>^..ix,  1,  i.x-  -  . 
n,.  -ir:!  alnstnbui  c.  .vxxvl. 


68 


THE    THEMES    IKE. VIED    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


Coyiircrcersia  \\\\^  C\ 
Pater  naufragus  divitis  socer. 

A  rich  iiian  three  times  importuned  a  poor  man  to  i^ive  him  his 
daui>;hter  in  marriat^e,  and  the  poor  man  three  times  rctused,  but 
havintr  started  with  his  daughter  on  a  v(\vai,^e  he  was  shipwrecked 
on  the  estate  of  the  rich  man  who  a^ain  asks  tor  the  daut;hter  as 
his  wiff.  The  poor  man  wept  in  silence.  After  the  marriai4e 
they  return  to  the  city  where  the  poor  man  wishes  to  lead  his 
daughter  before  the  magistrate,  but  the  rich  man  opposes  this. 

This  theme  may  easily  have  been  formed  on  the  analogy  of 
Plautus,  Triiumi.  Act  iii,  Scene  2,  where  the  {)oor  but  proud 
Lesbonicus  refuses  to  give  his  sister  to  Lysiteles  without  a  mar- 
riage portion. 

Coniroversia  ix,  2. 
Maiestatis  laesae  sit  actio. 

The  proconsul  Plamininus,  at  the  request  of  his  mistress  while 
at  table,  who  said  that  she  never  nad  witnessed  a  decapitation, 
had  a  condemned  man  executed.  He  is  thereupon  accused  of 
laesae  viaiesiatis. 

This  theme  is  based  upon  an  historical  fact.  L.  Flamininus  was 
expelled  Irom  the  senate  by  Cato  when  censor  in  184  B.  C, 
because  of  his  conduct  seven  years  before,  whtn  he  wantonly 
killed  a  chief  of  the  Boii,  who  had  taken  refuge  in  his  camp. 
Valerius  Maximus  agrees  with  Seneca  that  this  was  done  to  please 
a  mistress,  while  Valerius  Antias,  cited  in  Livy,  xxxix,  43,  gives  a 
similar  >tory.  Livy  and  Plutarch  say  that  the  cruel  act  was  done 
to  please  a  favorite  boy."' 

II. — Classification. 

A. —  TJie  Siiasoriac, 

I. — Simple  (whether  something  is  or  is  not  to  be  done),  i,  vi. 
Duplex  (a  choice  between  two  alternatives),  ii,  lii,  iv,  v.  vii. 
II. — According  to  the  sources: 

1.  Historical,  iv. 

2.  Suggested  by  an  historical  occurrence,  i,  ii. 
3    Derived  from  the  poets,  iii. 

4.   Fictitious,  V,  vi,  vii. 

^I'Cf.  Livy,  xxxix,  42;  Cicero,  De  souctut-  12;  I'lutarca,  Cato  r.  17; 
l^''hiftii)u)ius  c.  (S;  Valerius  .\Lixiimi<,  11  9,  3;  Auieliu-  Victor,  P-:  .///r 
illiistribus  47. 


> 


^ 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 

B. —  T/ie  ConiroTersiae, 
i. — General  character  of  the  suit. 


69 


r  : 


I.   Criminal 


\ 


2.  Civil  : 


•  ■ 

11,  7. 

iii.  5>  9- 
iv,  I,  4,  6. 
V,  I,  6,  7. 
vi,  3,  4.  5<  6,  8. 
vii,  3,  5>  7.  8. 
viii,  I,  6. 
ix,  2,  4,  5,  6. 
l^'.  I.  4.  5,  6. 

i,  I,  4'  6,  7,  8. 

ii,  I,  2. 

iii,  I,  2,  3,  4,  6,8. 

iv,  3.  5.  8- 
-i  V,  2,  4,  5. 
vi,  I,  2. 
vii,  I,  4. 
viii,  2,  3. 
x,  2. 

i,  2, 

ii>  3'  4»  5.  6. 
iii,  7. 
iv,  2,  7. 

V,  3,  8. 
vi,  7. 
vii,  2,  6. 
viii,  4,  5. 
ix,  I,  3- 
X,  3. 


II.— According  to  the    point    at  issue  (/.  e.  the  question  to  be 

decided,  or  the  charge  brought). 

1.  Admission  of  a  tyrant  to  office,  v,  8. 

2.  Adultery,  iv,  7  ;  vi,  6. 

3.  Claims  of  the  blinded,  iii,  i. 

4.  Damage  to  property,  iii,  6  ;  v,  5. 


3.  Affecting  the  political  or  social  status  :      \ 


70 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  WV    THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SEXECA. 


71 


6. 


8. 

9- 
10. 

1 1. 

12. 

13- 
14. 

^5- 

16. 

17. 

18. 

19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 

23- 
24. 

25- 

26. 
27. 
28. 
29. 


,  iv.  8. 
6 


I 


X 


Deception  {circimiscriptio),  vi,  3. 

DesecFcition  of  a  tonil),  iv,  4. 

Disinheritance  {abdifatio).  i,  i,  4.  6,  S  ;  ;i.  i.  2 

iv,  3,  5  :  V,  2,  4  ;  vi,  1,2;  vii,  i  ;   \ 
Force  unlawfully  applied  {vis),  ix,  s- 
Force  in  court  {I'is  in  indicia),  vi,  5  ; 
Force  and  intimidation  [ids  et  mcius 
Ingratitude  {im^^rati  actio  ,  ii.  5  ;   ix, 
Injury  to  the  person  {ininria),  iv,  i  : 
Insanity,  ii,  3,  4  ;  vi.  7  ;  vii,  6  ;   x.  3. 
Laesac  7naiesiatis,  ix,  2. 
Laesae  rtdpnhlicac,  v,  7  ;   x,  4,  5. 
Malejicitim,  v,  i. 

Maltreatment  ^malac  tracticviis  actio 
Misbehavior  (dc  7)wribus),  vii,  2. 
Parricide,  iii,  2  ;  v,  4  ;   vii,  3,  5  ;   ix.  4. 
Poisonin^^,  iii,  7  ;  vi,  4,  6  ;   vii,  3  ;   ix,  6 
Priestly  integrity  (moral  and  physical 
Punishment  of  rape,  i,  5  ;  iii.  5  :  vii,  8. 
Reward  of  bravery,  iv,  7. 
Sacrilege,  viii,  i,  2. 

Seditious  meeting  {coettcs  ct ctvicnrsus'^K  iii,  S. 
Slaves,  punishment  of,  iii.  9  ;  \i!i.  3;  ^ci.  \  ii,  6.) 
Suicide,  refusal  of  burial  to,  viii,  4. 
Support  of  parents,  i.  i.  7  :  vii,  4. 
Treason,  vii,  7  ;   (cf.  x,  6.) 


in 
X,  2, 


4 ; 


1,  6. 


in, 


IV, 


6 


\', 


2  N      • 


iv,  2  ;   vi,  8. 


III. — Side  issues  (/.  e.  wnth  what  the  action  is  concerned). 

1.  Adultery,  rape  and  incest,  i.  2.  3.  4,  5  ;   ii,  3,  7  ;   iii,  5.  8  ;  iv, 

3 ;  V,  6  ;  vi,  8  ;  vii,  8  :  viii,  6  :  ix,  i ,  6. 

2.  Exposed  children,  ix,  3  :  x.  4. 

3.  Mistresses,  ii,  4  ;  ix,  2. 

4.  Pirates,  i,  6.  7  ;  iii,  3:  vii,  i,  4. 

5.  Poor  and  rich,  ii,  i  ;  v,  2,  5  :   viii.  6  ;   x,  i. 

6.  Step-mother  and  step-children,  ii,  7  ;  iv,  5,  6  ;  ix.  5,  6. 

7.  Suicide,  v,  i  ;  viii,  i,  3,  4. 

8.  Tyrants  and  tyrcmnicide,  ii,  5  ;  iii,  6  :  iv,  7  ;  v,  8  :  ix,  4. 

9.  Valiant  man  (^fortis),  i,  4,  8  ;  iv,  4  ;  viii,  5  ;  x,  2. 


^     *v 


III. — Parallels   of   thf:   subjects   discussed   in  the  Con- 

IKOVICRSIAE    OF    SeXECA,    THE    DECLAMATIONS    OF    THE 
PSEI'DO-QUIXTILLVX,    AXD    CaLPURNIUS    FlACCUS. 

I.   Subjects  idcjitical. 

Seneca,  ii,  3 — Qaintilian,  349. 

A  ravisher  must  perish  unless  within  thirty  days  he  appeases  his 
own  father  and  the  father  of  the  ravished. 

A  ravisher  appeased  the  father  of  the  ravished  but  not  his  own. 
He  charges  him  with  hisanity."'^" 

Seneca,  ii,  4 — Calpurnius  Flaccus,  30. 

A  m.m  disinherited  his  son;  the  latter  betook  himself  to  a 
courtesan  and  begot  a  son  by  her.  Being  ill  he  sent  for  his  father; 
when  he  had  come  he  commended  his  son  to  him  and  died.  After 
his  death  his  father  adopted  the  child  ;  he  is  charged  with  insanity 
by  his  other  son."'-^ 

Seneca,  iii,  5  —  Calpurnius  Flaccus,  33. 

A  ravished  woman  may  require  either  the  death  of  the  ravisher, 
or  that  he  shall  marry  her  without  dowry. ■^*" 

A  ravisher  demands  that  the  ravished  one  be  produced  (so  that 
she  may  make  her  choice).     The  father  does  not  permit. ^"^ 

Seneca,  iii,  9 — Quintilian,  380. 

A  master  being  ill  asked  his  slave  to  give  him  poison,  the  latter 
refused.  The  m.ister  provided  by  his  will  that  the  slave  should 
be  crucified  by  the  heirs.     The  slave  appeals  to  the  tribunes.'^" 

Seneca,  iv,  4 — Quintilian,  369. 

Action  for  desecration  of  a  tonib.  During  a  war  in  a  certain 
state  a  valiant  man,  who  had  lost  his  arms  in  battle,  took  the 
arms  from  the  tomb  of  another  valiant  man.  After  fighting 
bravely  he  restored  the  arms.  He  received  the  reward  (of 
bravery)  but  was  accused  of  desecration  of  a  tomb.^"^ 

^'"  Cf.  Qaintilian,  Inst.  (haf.  ix,  2,  90. 

■"'  Tne  slight  variations  in  the  theme  as  given  by  Calpurnius  Flaccus  do 
not  affect  the  point  at  issue.  These  are  that  the  father  disinherited  the  son 
on  account  of  his  love  affair,  and  that  he  only  wished  to  adopt  the  child, 

'■■^Cf.  Seneca,  i,  5  ;   vii,  8  ;  viii,  6. 

■^-'  In  Calpurnius  Flaccus  the  father  forcibly  restrains  the  woman. 

3"  Quintilian  adds  that  the  master  had  promised  the  slave  his  liberty. 

3-3  In  Quintilian  the  substance  of  the  theme  is  given  in  a  shorter  form. 


> 


,r^ 


^^2  THE    THF^[ES    TREATED    P.V    TIIF.    ELDER    SENECA. 

Seneca,  vi,  5 — Quintilian,  3S6. 

He  who  uses  violence  in  couit  should  suffer  capital  punish- 
ment. 

Iphicrates  hav  no;  been  sent  aoainst  the  kini;  of  the  Thracians 
and  conquered  t^ice  in  battle,  concluded  a  treaty  with  ii;m  and 
married  his  daughter.  When  he  had  retunicMi  to  Athens  and 
was  brought  before  a  court,  some  Thracians  were  seen  about 
armed  with  knives,  and  the  defendant  himself  drew  a  sword. 
When  the  judges  were  cailed  upon  to  pronounce  judgment 
they  openly  acquitted  him.  He  is  accused  of  using  vioknce  in 
court.-'' 

Seneca,  vi,  6 — Quintilian,  354 — Calpurnius  Maccus,  y). 
Action  for  poisoning. 

A  man  who  had  a  wife  and  bv  her  a  marriageable  dauuliter, 
informed  his  wite  to  whom  he  intended  to  give  the  daughter  in 
marriage.  The  wnfe  said  :  "  She  shall  die  sooner  than  man  y  ihat 
man."  Tlie  daughter  died  betore  the  wedding  day  with  suspicious 
signs  of  cruel  treatment  and  poisoning.  The  tather  put  a  maid- 
servant to  the  torture:  she  said  that  she  knew  nothing  about 
poison  but  she  did  know  about  the  adultery  of  her  mistress  with 
that  man  to  whom  he  was  intending  to  give  his  daughter  in  mar- 
riage.    The  tather  accused  his  wife  of  poisoning  and   aduiterv.  '*- 

Seneca,  vii,  3 — Quintili.tn,  17. 

A  son  who  had  been  three  times  disinherited  and  torgiven 
was  surprised  by  his  father  in  a  retired  part  of  the  hou.-c  pre- 
paring a  potion.  WTien  asked  what  it  was  he  sa.id  it  was  poison, 
and  that  he  wished  to  die;  he  [)oured  it  (  ut.  I  le  is  aoeust  d  of 
parricide."" 

^■-■*  Quintilian  limits  himself  to  the  brief  statenuut  that  Ipliicratcs  .  aine 
into  court  girded  with  a  sword  and  brought  witli  hitn  C<)t\s  king  ot  the 
Thracians. 

2-^  In  Quintilian  the  episode  of  the  torture  and  ronfes-inn  i.f  the  ina;.;-s(T- 
vent  is  wanting;  suspicion  against  the  wife  ari>c>  fnun  he  r  saxing  :  "  Siie 
shall  die  before  she  marries,"  and  from  the  f.icc  t!  at  tiie  husband  h.ad  ^t  en 
her  secretly  conversing  with  the  handsome  voung  man  to  whom  he  betrothes 
his  daughter;  cf.  also  Hermogenes,  ~e[n  Tdv  GTaouoi\  -"^ptrtigel.  A''-'.  (,r,:et. 
ii,  143. 

■^-•'  In  Quintilian  the  dramatic  touch  is  added  tl)at  the  father  ordered  the 
son  to  drink  the  mixture. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


73 


. ,'  ( 


■^    I   -^ 


J     I    V 


Seneca,  vii,  8 — Quintilian,  309. 

A  ravished  woman  may  request  either  the  death  of  the  ravisher, 
or  that  he  shall  marry  her  without  dowry. '''^' 

A  woman  who  had  been  ravished  when  produced  in  court  chose 
marriage.  The  young  man  who  was  defendant  denied  that  he 
was  the  ravisher.  He  was  condemned,  and  the  woman  then  chose 
his  death  although  he  was  then  willing  to  marry  her.  The  man 
protests.'"' 

Seneca,  viii,  i — Calpurnius  Flaccus,  41. 

A  magistrate  may  inflict  punishment  upon  one  who  has  con- 
fessed. 

A  woman  who  had  lost  her  husband  and  two  sons  handed  her- 
self. Her  third  son  cut  the  rope.  She,  when  a  sacrilege  had 
been  committed  and  the  perpetrator  was  being  sought  for,  told 
the  magistrate  that  she  was  the  guilty  party.  The  magistrate 
wishes  to  inflict  punishment  on  her  on  the  ground  of  her  confes- 
sion.    The  son  objects.^^^ 

Seneca,  ix,  6— Quintilian.  381 — Calpurnius  Flaccus,  12. 

A  poisoner  may  be  tortured  until  she  discloses  her  accomplices. 

A  man  after  the  death  of  his  wife,  by  whom  he  had  a  son,  mar- 
ried another  wife  and  by  her  had  a  daughter.  The  young  man 
died,  and  the  husband  accused  the  step-mother  of  poisoning  him. 
Having  been  condemned,  she  said  under  torture  that  her  daughter 
was  her  accomplice.  The  daughter  is  demanded  for  punishment. 
The  lather  defends  her."" 

2.     Subjects  more  or  less  cognate. 

Seneca,  i,  4 — Quintilian,  330. 
He  who  surprises  an  adulterer  with  an  adulteress  and  kills  them 
shall  be  without  guilt. 

It  shall  be  permissible  even  for  a  son  to  punish  adultery  in  his 

mother. 

•"•"  Cf.  Seneca,  i,  5  ;   iii,  5  ;   vii,  8  ;   viii,  6. 

3'^^  In  Quintilian  it  is  stated  that  she  wished  freedom  of  choice  after  the 
conviction. 

8'^Mn  Calpurnius  Flaccus  she  has  lost  her  husband   and  three  sons  out  of 

four. 

330  In  Quintilian  this  theme  is  given  briefly  with  the  addition  that  the 
son  died  "  ambiguis  signis."     Calpurnius  P^laccus  uses  the  same  phrase. 


f 


74 


THE    TTTEMES    TRE  MED    VA'    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


IIli:    niEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SEXECA. 


75 


A  valiant  man  who  liad  lost  his  hands  in  war  sur[)risecl  an 
adulterer  with  his  wife  by  whom  he  had  a  son  now  a  youn^  man. 
He  ordered  his  son  to  kill  but  he  did  not.  The  adulterer  escaj)ed, 
and  he  disinherited  his  son.'" 

In  Quintilian  the  filial  piety  of  the  son  towards  his  mother,  at 
the  expense  of  his  injured  father,  is  in  a  different  iorm.  A  man 
repudiated  his  wife  on  a  ehar^i^e  ot  adultery  ;  his  son  l)y  her  came 
to  him  and  told  him  that  he  w.is  in  love  with  a  courtesan.  His 
father  gave  him  money,  and  with  it  he  sui)p()rted  his  mother,  who 
was  in  want,  without  the  knowledge  of  his  father.  When  his 
father  found  it  out  he  disinherited  his  son. 

Seneca,  i,  5 — Quintilian,  270 — Calpurnius  Flaccus,  49. 

A  ravished  woman  may  require  either  the  death  of  the  ravisher, 
or  that  he  shall  marry  her  without  a  dowrv.'" 

A  man  ravished  two  women  the  same  night  ;  one  requires  his 
death,  the  other  marriage. 

In  Quintilian  the  act  was  per[)etrated  on  one  of  twin  sisters. 
The  victim  hanged  herselt".  but  the  father  produced  the  other  in 
court  and  instructed  her  to  require  the  death  of  the  ra\isher.  The 
young  man,  supposing  that  this  was  the  woman  whom  he  had 
ravished,  was  condemned.  When  the  deceit  w.is  found  out  the 
father  was  accused  of  murder. 

In  Calpurnius  Flaccus  the  case  is  the  same  as  in  Seneca,  but 
the  point  at  issue  is  different.  The  court  decided  for  the  more 
humane  demand;  after  the  marriage  the  other  woman  bore  a 
child  (by  the  ravisher).  The  latter  exposed  it,  but  the  husband 
of  this  other  woman  took  it  U[)  and  began  to  rear  it;  whereupon 
he  is  accused  by  his  wife  ot  ma/ae  iyaciatioiiis. 

Seneca,  i,  6 — Quintilian,  376. 
A  man  captured  by  pirates  wrote  to  his  father  in  regard  to  a 
ransom,  but  was  not  ransomed.  The  daughter  of  the  pirate-chief 
compelled  the  man  to  swear  that  he  would  marry  her  if  he  were 
set  free  ;  he  swore  to  do  so.  She  left  her  father  and  followed  the 
young  man.  After  returning  to  his  fluher  he  married  her.  An 
orphan  appears  on  the  scene  whom  the  young  man's  fither  com- 

3'>'  From  the  context  it  would  seem  that  the  father's  command  to  the  son 
was  to  kill  both  the  guilty  parties. 
^3-  Cf.  Seneca,  iii,  8  ;   vii,  S  ;   viii.  6. 


i 

f 


. 


r 


mands  him  to  marry  after  dismissing  the  daughter  of  the  pirate- 
chief      Upon  his  refusal  he  is  disinherited. 

In  Quintilian  it  is  the  daughter  of  a  benefactor  who  is  in  the 
case.  A  man  when  dying  offers  to  reveal  to  a  young  man,  whom 
he  has  brought  up  as  his  own  son,  his  true  ])arentage  if  he  will 
take  an  oath  that  he. will  marry  the  daughter  whom  the  dying  man 
is  leaving.  The  young  man  swore  to  do  so.  Being  received  by 
his  real  father  after  the  death  of  his  benefictor,  upon  his  refusal 
t'>  marry  a  rich  orphan,  he  is  disinherited. 

Seneca,  i,  7 — Quintilian,  5. 

Let  children  care  for  their  parents  or  suffer  punishment. 

A  man  killed  one  brother  w'ho  was  a  tyrant,  and  another  whom 
lie  had  caught  in  adultery,  although  his  father  entreated  him  not 
to  do  so.  Being  captured  by  pirates  he  wrote  to  his  father  in 
regard  to  a  r.msom.  The  father  wrote  to  the  pirates  oftering  them 
a  double  sum  if  they  would  cut  off  liis  son's  hands.  The  pirates 
released  the  son  who,  afterward,  when  his  father  was  in  want,  did 
not  su[)port  him. 

In  Quintilian  the  same  point  is  at  issue,  but  the  circumstances 
are  ditferent.  A  man  had  two  sons,  one  respectable,  the  other 
dissipated.  Both  went  abroad  and  were  captured  by  pirates, 
whereupon  the  profligate  became  ill.  Both  wrote  home  in  regard 
to  a  ransom.  The  father  turned  all  his  property  into  money  and 
came  to  them.  The  pirates  told  him  that  he  brought  only  enough 
to  redeem  one.  and  that  he  might  choose  whichever  he  wished. 
He  ransomed  the  one  who  was  ill,  who  died  while  on  his  way 
home.  The  other  made  his  escape  and  when  his  father  demanded 
supi)ort,  refused. 

Seneca,  ii,  2 — Quintilian,  357. 

A  husband  and  wife  took  a  mutual  oath  that  if  one  died  the 
other  would  not  survive.  The  husband  went  abroad  and  sent  a 
messenger  to  inform  his  wife  that  he  was  dead.  Thereupon  she 
threw  herself  from  a  height,  but  survived.  She  is  commanded  by 
her  father  to  leave  her  husl)and,  and  on  her  refusal  is  disinherited. 

In  Quintilian  it  is  a  wife  who  complains  about  her  husband  to 
her  father  and  is  commanded  by  the  latter  to  keep  the  peace. 
But  afterward  when  her  husband  had  been  blinded  on  account  of 
adultery  and  she  refused  to  desert  him,  she  is  disinherited. 


76 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


Seneca,  ii,  5 — Quintilian,  251. 

A  wife,  who  was  tortured  bv  a  tyrant  to  force  lier  to  declare 
whether  she  knew  anything  of  a  j)lot  formed  by  her  hu>i)and  t;>r 
the  murder  of  the  tyrant,  persevered  in  denyin^^  Afterward  lur 
husband  killed  the  tyrant.  As  she  bore  no  childrc  n  f(  r  five  years 
her  husband  divorced  her  under  the  pretext  of  barrenness.  An 
action  is  brought  for  incrratitude. 

In  Quintihan  it  is  a  case  oii?iius/i  repudii,  the  union  havini^^  taken 
place  after  a  rape,  when  the  woman  had  her  choice  between  the 
death  of  the  ravisher  and  marriacre,  which  marriaoe  the  hu-band 
now  tries  to  dissolve  on  the  charge  of  barrenness. 

Seneca,  ii,  7 — Quintilian,  325  and  363. 

A  man  who  had  a  beautitul  wife  went  abroad.  A  merchant 
from  foreign  parts  settled  in  the  neighborhood,  and  three  limes 
made  proposals  to  the  woman.  otTering  her  drifts.  She,  however, 
reiused.  The  merchant  died,  and  by  his  will  made  the  beautiful 
woman  heir  of  all  his  property,  adding  the  eulogv  :  "  I  found  her 
chaste."  She  entered  upon  the  inheritance.  Her  husbar.d  reti:rned 
and  accused  her  of  adultery  on  suspicion. 

In  Quintilian  325  a  rich  man  and  a  poor  man  are  neighbors. 
There  was  a  rumor  that  the  poor  man's  pretty  wife  was  unduly 
intimate  with  the  rich  man,  with  the  connivance  of  her  husband. 
The  latter  was  accused  of  procuring  Ucnociyiif).  but  was  ac{}uitted. 
The  rich  man  died  leaving  the  poor  man  heir  to  all  his  propertv, 
adding:  ''  I  ask  you  to  restore  this  legacy  to  that  person  of  whom 
I  made  a  request."  The  poor  man's  wife  demands  the  legacy  as 
'*  fidei  commissam." 

In  Quintilian  363  the  poor  man  with  the  beautiful  wife  is 
solicited  three  times,  with  an  offer  of  gifts  by  the  foreign  merchant, 
that  he  may  let  him  his  wife  for  an  immoral  purpose.  The  hus- 
band sends  a  wardrobe-maid  in  the  garb  of  a  matron.  An  action 
is  brought  for  mala  traciatio. 

Seneca,  vi,  7 — Quintilian,  291— Calpurnius  Flaccus,  46. 

There  may  be  an  action  for  insanity. 

A  man  who  had  two  sons  married  again.  When  one  of  the 
young  men  fell  ill,  and  was  at  the  point  of  death,  the  physicians 
declared  that  the  trouble  was  a  mental  one.  The  father  forced 
the  son  at  the  sword's  point  to  disclose  the  cause.     He  said  that 


^   \\ 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


77 


•    - 


/    >v 


he  was  in  love  with  his  step-mother.  The  father  gave  up  his 
wiie  to  him.  and  was  thereupon  charged  by  his  other  son  with 
insanity. 

In  Quintilian  and  Calpurnius  Flaccus  it  is  one  of  the  sons  who, 
at  the  instance  of  his  father,  gives  up  his  wife  to  his  lovesick 
brother.  The  latter  afterwards  finds  his  wife  in  adultery  with  her 
former  husband  and  kills  them.  For  this  he  is  disinherited  by 
his  lather.  In  Calpurnius  Pdaccus  it  is  distinctly  stated  that  the 
second  husband  kills  both;  in  Quintilian  only  the  woman  is 
mentioned  as  beino-  killed. 

Seneca,  vii,  3 — Quintilian,  377. 

A  son  who  had  been  three  times  disinherited  and  forgiven  was 
surprised  by  his  father  in  a  retired  part  of  the  house  prei)aring  a 
potion.  When  asked  what  it  was  he  said  it  was  poison  and  that 
he  Wished  to  die;  he  poured  it  out.  He  is  accused  of  par- 
ricide.''' 

In  Quintilian  377  the  son  is  driven  to  this  desperate  deed 
because  his  father  was  about  to  send  him  for  the  third  time  to 
militarv  service. 

Seneca  vii,  4 — Quintilian  6  and  16. 

Let  children  care  for  their  parents  or  suffer  punishment. 

A  man  who  had  a  wife  and  a  son  i)y  her  went  abroad  ;  being 
c<iptured  by  |)irates  he  wrote  to  his  wife  and  son  in  regard  to  a 
ransom.  The  wite  lost  lier  eyesight  through  weeping.  She 
demanded  sup})ort  of  her  son  as  he  was  setting  out  to  ransom  his 
lather,  WHien  he  refuses  to  remain  she  wishes  him  to  be  sustained 
l)y  force. 

In  Quintilian  6  th(^  son  set  out  to  free  his  father  by  becoming 
captive  in  his  place  {vicariis  manibus).  He  died  in  captivity  and 
his  corj)se  hiving  b -en  tliiown  into  the  sea  was  cast  up  on  the 
shore  ut  his  native  laiui.  The  lather  wishes  to  give  it  burial,  the 
mother  forbids. 

In  Quintilian  16  the  case  concerns  two  friends  of  whom  one  has 
a  morher,  who,  while  travelling  abroad,  fell  into  the  hands  of  a 
tyrant.  The  mother  lost  lier  eyesight  through  weeping.  The 
tvrant  otfered  to  allow  the  son  to  go  and  see  his  mother  on  condi- 
tion  that  if  he  did  not  return  by  a  specified  day  the   other  vou  g 

•'^^'^  Identical  with  Oiiirailian   17. 


78 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


man  should  suffer  [)unishnient.     The  son  havini^  bounrl  himself 
by  oath  to  return  came  to  his  own  country.      His  mother  prext-nts 
him  from  returniny^  by  the  hivv  which  torbids  ch  i(!rcn   to  desert 
their  parents  in  distress. 

• 

Seneca,  vii,  5— Quintilian,  i  and  2. 

A  man  after  the  death  of  his  wife,  by  whom  he  had  a  s:)n, 
married  ao^ain  and  had  a  son  of  this  marriage  also.  There  was  in 
the  house  a  handsome  steward.  When  there  were  frtcpient 
quarrels  between  the  step-mother  and  the  step-son,  the  latter  was 
ordered  by  his  father  to  move.  He  hired  the  dwelling  next  door. 
Rumor  charured  the  steward  and  the  step-mother  with  adultc;  y. 
Finally  the  father  of  the  funily  was  found  murdered  in  his  Ixd- 
chamber,  the  wife  wounded,  and  the  partition  wall  between  the 
houses  of  the  father  and  the  son  broken  through.  The  relations 
determined  to  ask  the  five-year  old  son.  who  slept  with  his  father 
and  mother,  whom  he  recoi^nized  as  the  murderer.  He  pointed 
at  the  steward.  The  son  accuses  the  steward  of  murder,  the 
steward  tlie  son  of  parricide. 

In  Quintilian  i  there  is  no  steward  in  the  case  ;  the  dramaiis 
pcrsoyiae  are  a  father,  his  second  wife  and  a  blind  son  by  his  fust 
wife.  The  father  is  found  murdered  in  bed  beside  his  wife  with 
the  son's  sword  sticking;  in  the  wound.  On  the  wall  separatino- 
the  father's  room  from  that  of  the  son  are  the  bloodv  marks  of  a 
hand.     Step-son  and  step-mother  accuse  each  other. 

In  Quintilian  2  there  are  also  a  blind  sou  and  a  step-mother  but 
the  relations  are  more  complicated.  The  son  had  formerly 
rescued  his  father  from  a  burnincr  house,  and  had  lost  his  eyesit^ht 
while  tryin^e:  vainly  to  rescue  his  mother.  A  time  came  when  the 
step-mother  asserted  to  the  father  that  his  son  h.id  {)repared 
poison  for  him  and  had  otfered  her  half  of  the  pro{)erty  if  she 
would  administer  the  poison.  The  son  bein^^  questioned  denied 
this,  but  when  his  father  searched  he  lound  the  })oison  about  his 
person.  When  asked  for  whom  he  had  prepared  it  the  son  was 
silent.  The  father  altered  his  will  making  the  step-mother  his 
heir.  On  the  same  ni^ht  a  noise  was  heard  in  the  house,  and 
when  the  household  entered  the  chamber  of  their  master  they 
found  him  murdered  and  the  step-mother  apparently  asleep  beside 
the  corpse,  while  the  blind  son  was  standini^^  at  the  door  of  his 
chamber,  his  bloody  sword  being  under  his  pillow.  Step-son  and 
step-mother  accuse  each  other. 


»    ' 


/       •  V 


\ 


r 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  \^\    THE  ELDER  SEXECA. 


79 


Seneca,  viii,  3 — Calpurnius  Flaccus,  47. 

The  father  of  two  sons  gave  a  wife  to  one.  The  latter  went 
abroad,-  and  rumor  began  to  allege  improper  relations  between 
the  father-in-law  and  the  daughter-in-law.  When  the  husband 
returned  he  subjected  his  wife's  maid  to  the  torture  so  severely 
that  she  died  under  it ;  whereupon  in  his  uncertainty  as  to  what 
he  wished  to  know  he.  hanged  himself.  The  father  commanded 
the  other  son  to  marry  the  widow,  and  upon  his  refusal  disin- 
herited him. 

In  Calpurnius  Flaccus  the  husband  who  suspected  his  father 
ot  improper  relations  ivith  his  wife  surprised  the  latter  in  adultery 
with  a  man  whose  leatures  were  concealed.  He  killed  only  his 
wile,  and  is  charged  with  murder.  He  demands  that  his  father 
shall  defend  him,  and  his  father  objects. 

Seneca,  viii,  6 — Quintilian,  257. 

A  ravished  woman  may  require  either  the  death  of  the  ravisher, 
or  that  he  shall  marry  her  without  dowry.^-" 

A  rich  man  three  times  addressed  a  poor  man  in  regard  to 
giving  him  his  daughter  in  marriage,  and  three  times  the  poor 
man  refused.  Having  started  on  a  voyage  with  his  daughter  the 
poor  man  was  shipwrecked  upon  the  estate  of  the  rich  man  who 
again  appealed  to  him  in  regard  to  marriage  with  his  daughter. 
The  poor  man  wept  but  kept  silent.  Nevertheless  the  rich  man 
consummated  the  nuptials.  Upon  their  return  to  the  city  the 
poor  man  wishes  to  bring  his  daughter  before  the  court  (that  she 
may  demand  tiie  death  of  the  rich  man).     The  rich  man  protests. 

In  Quintilian  a  man  who  had  a  son  and  a  rich  enemy  was  cap- 
tured by  pir.ites.  He  wrote  to  his  son  in  regard  to  a  ransom. 
The  son  had  no  money  but  when  the  rich  man  offered  him  his 
daughter  in  marriage  he  accepted  her  and  thus  obtained  means  to 
ransom  his  father.  The  latter  on  his  return  commands  his  son  to 
put  away  his  wife,  and  upon  refusal  disinherits  him. 

Seneca,  ix,  4 — Quintilian,  362, 

Whosoever  strikes  his  father  let  his  hands  be  cut  off. 

A  tyrant  who  held  captive  a  father  and  his  two  sons  com- 
manded the  young  men  to  strike  their  father.  One  of  them  threw 
himself  headlong  to  death,  the  other  obeyed  and  was  afterward 


334 


Cf,  Seneca,  i,  5  ;   iii,  5  ;  vii,  S. 


8o 


THE   THEMES   TREATED    BY   THE    ELDER   SENECA. 


received  into  the  tyrant's  favor.  The  yoiin-  man  kiUrd  ilw  t\  r.int. 
anJ  received  a  reward.  A  dcniand  is  made  that  his  h.ands  he  cut 
off.     His  father  defends  hini. 

In  Qaintilian  the  crime  is  much  ao^oravated  hy  the  fict  tliat 
there  is  no  compulsion  :  two  youths  taking  an  oath  each  to  .strike 
the  other's  father;  on  the  other  hand  there  is  no  actual  strikniu  of 
one's  own  father.  A  demand  is  made  that  their  handb  be  cut  off; 
their  fathers  deiend  them. 

Seneca,  ix,  5  —  Cal[)urnins  Flaccns.  34. 

Let  there  be  an  action  on  a  charge  of  force   nnlawhilly  applied. 

A  man,  having  a  wife,  lost  two  sons  by  a  former  wile  witii  su.s- 
picious  signs  of  cruel  treatment  and  poisoning.  The  th  rd  son 
was  abducted  by  his  maternal  ;^randfather  who  had  not  been 
admitted  to  see  the  others  when  ill.  Wht-n  the  t.ither  sou-^ht  to 
find  his  son  t)v  means  of  a  public  crier  the  -randiather  acknowl- 
edged that  the  son  was  with  him.  and  wa.>  rharged  with  lorce 
unlawfully  apj)lied. 

In  Calpurnius  Pdaccus  a  repudiated  wiie,  who  had  a  son,  .liter 
repeated  attempts  witiiout  success  to  obtain  a  ree(^nriliation  with 
iier  hus;)and,  uttered  a  threat  that  she  would  aveni;e  lurselt.  The 
husband  gave  the  bov  a  step-motlK-r,  and  the  bov  died  with  suspi- 
cious signs  ot  cruel  treatment  and  poisoning.  The  twtj  women 
accuse  each  other. 

The  circumstances  in  the  two  declamations  aie  much  the  s.tme, 
but  the  jutlicial  poiiU  at  issue  is  in  one  case  7-/,v,  in  the  "tliei  hitmi- 
cide.^'' 


It  there  be  more 
ul!C;<il  dec'sion. 
riic   laditi    a.-ks 


Seneca,  x,  j — Qaintilian,  258. 

Let  a  valicUit  man  choose  what  reward  he  w:H 
than  one  claimant  let  the  matter  i)e  sfitled   l-y  .1 

A  father  and  son  ha\'e  ix'th  !'»ui;ht  Vahantly. 
the  son  to  give  up  to  him  the  reward  ol  bravrry.  The  hon 
refuses;  the  maUer  is  carried  into  court  and  the  son  wins.  There- 
upon he  asks  as  a  reward  tint  statues  be  erected  to  h's  liither 
who,  however,  di.^inhents  hii;^ 

In  Qaintilian  alter  the  son  has  refused  to  ^ive  up  the  reward  to 
his  lather  the  latter  yields  and  disinherits  him. 

335  Cf.  also  Seneca,  vi,  6  ;  Quintilian,  354  ;  Calpurnius  Flaccus,  39. 


i 


ih 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


81 


Synoptic  table  of  f  lie  para /Ids  of  the  subjects  of  the  Conirovcrsiae 
of  Seneca,  the  Declamations  of  the  pseiido-Ouintilian 

and  Calpnrniiis  Flaccus 

I.    Subjects  identical. 


Pseudo- 

Calpurnius 

Seneca. 

Quintilian. 

Flaccus. 

ii.  3 

349 

ii.  4 

30 

iii,  5 

33 

iii,  9 

380 

iv,  4 

369 

vi,  5 

386 

vi,  6 

354 

39 

vii,  3 

T7 

vii,  8 

309 

viii,  I 

41 

ix,  6 

381 

12 

Cf  Qaintilian.  Inst.  Oral,  ix,  2,  90. 


Cl.  Ilermogenes, -£//i  rw^  a'datiov 
(Spengel,  Rhet.  Grace,  ii.  143.) 


2.    Subjects  more  or  less  cognate. 


^f 


beaeca. 

4 

■   S 
,  6 

>7 
i,  2 

h  7 
vi,  7 

vii,  3 

vii,  4 

vii,  5 
viii,  3 
vni,  6 
ix,  4 

ix,  q 


P.seudo- 
Quintilian. 

270 
376 

5 

251 

325  and  363 
291 

6  and  16 
I  and  2 

257 

362 

2=;8 


Calpurnius 
Flaccus. 

49 


46 


4' 


U 


6 


• 


S2  THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 

IV. — Tm:  I.fj.AL  Aspects  uf   ihk  Cu.NTKuvLKbiAi.  of 

Seneca. 

Co}it> .  1,3. 

Law:   Let  the  incestuous  priestess  be  huiled  iVoiii  a  rock. 

A  priestess  accused  ot  incest  before  she  was  hurled  troni  tlie 
rock  invoked  Vesta.  She  remained  ahve,  and  was  demanded 
again  for  a  repetition  ot'the  penaUy.'^^ 

The  Vestals  vowed  chastitv  tor  thirty  years,  and  severe  penal- 
ties were  appointed  for  the  violation  of  this  vow,  as  it  was  believed 
to  provoke  the  wrath  of  the  gods  u})on  the  country.  The  ponti- 
fices — later  the  emperors — sat  in  judgment  on  the  offending 
Vestals.  In  the  earliest  times  thev  were  scourged  to  death,  but 
from  the  time  of  Tarquinius  Priscus  '"  they  were  buried  alive, 
although  according  to  Orosius  '"  in  273  B.  C.  a  Vestal  was 
hanged.  Those  convicted  were  carried  on  a  !)icr  in  silence 
through  the  streets  and.  at'ter  being  scourged,  "' were*  iuimured 
ahve  with  some  ibod  and  a  candle  in  a  small  subterranean  vault  in 
the  Campus  Sceleratus  at  the  Colline  gate  '" 

The  male  accomplice  was  scourged  to  death  in  the  market 
place.^*'"'      According  to  Dio  Cassius  "  he  was  alter  the  scourging 

22^  That  this  is  a  reference  to  a  fictitious  law  of  the  schools  was  stated 
above,  p.  63. 

33' Cf.  Dion.  Hal.,  Antiq.  Rom.  i,  78. 


338 


IV,  5,  9. 


•■''Cf.  Dion.  Hal,,  A>itiq.  Kom.  ix,  40. 


3*^  Cf.  ibid,  ii,  67  ;  viii,  89  ;  Livy,  viii,  i  5,  7  sq.:  "  Eo  anno  Minucia  Vestalis 
suspecta  primo  propter  niundiorem  iusto  cultum,  insimulata  deincie  apud 
pontifices  ab  indice  servo  cum  decreto  eorum  iussa  esset  sacris  ab.stinere 
familiamque  in  potestate  habere,  facto  iudicio  viva  >ul)  terrani  ad  portam 
Collinatn  dextra  viam  stratam  dcfossa  Scelerato  Canipo  ;  credo  incesto  id 
ei  loconomen  factum";  ibid,  xxii,  57,  2  :  "Quae  Vestales  eo  anncj  Epiniia 
atque  Floronia,  stupri  conpertae,  et  altera  sub  terra,  uti  nios  est,  ad  portam 
Collinam  necata  fuerat,  altera  sibimet  ipsa  mortem  consciverat  ";  ;/'/(/.  K[)it. 
xiv:  "  Sextilia,  virgoVestalis,damnata  incesti.viva  defossa  est  "  (but  the  pas- 
sage contains  nothing  about  the  punishment  of  the  male  accomplice  to  which 
Rein  refers).  Servius  ad  Verg.,  ,-/^//.  xi,2o6;  Plutarch,  A'um.  to  ;  Fab.  Max. 
18  ;  Juvenal,  Sat.  iv,  8  sq.  ■*  Incestus,  cum  quo  nuper  vittata  iacebat  san- 
guine adhuc  vivo  terram  subitura  sacerdos";  IMiny,  Epist.  iv,  11;  St, 
Augustine,  De  Civitate  Dei  iii,  5;   Zonaeus,  viii,  p.  326,  ed.  Dind. 

^*' Cf.  Dion.  Hal.,  Antiq.  Roin.wW,  89;  ix,  40;  Livy,  xxii,  57,  3:  "  L. 
Cantilius  scriba  pontificis,  quos  nunc  minores  pontifices  adpellant,  qui  cum 
Floronia  stuprum  fecerat,  a  f)ontifice  maximo  eo  usque  virgis  in  comitio 
caesus  erat,  ut  inter  verbera  exspiraret." 

^■*-'  Ixxix,  9. 


\ 


r 


\ 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


83 


Strangled  in  prison.  P,ut  tliis  was  not  the  original  punishment. 
Tlie  punislinunt  ot  the  criminals  was  lollowed  by  great  expiatory 
sacritices  to  avert  diseases  and  other  visitations  of  the  gods.^"" 

This  {)enaliy  rt-mained  in  force  as  long  as  the  institution  of  the 
Vestals  was  in  existence,  even  under  the  Christian  emperors.'" 

Conir.  i,  4. 

Law  :  Let  the  man  who  surprises  a  man  and  woman  in  adultery 
be  with.out  l)lame  if  he  kills  both. 

Law  :  Let  it  be  lawful  even  lor  a  son  to  punish  adultery  in  his 
mother. 

A  valiant  man  who  had  lost  both  hands  in  war,  caught  his  wife 
and  her  j)aramour  in  jiaoyajitc  and  ordered  his  son  to  kill  them. 
The  young  man  refused  and  the  adulterer  escaped,  thereupon  the 
son  is  disinherited."*' 

In  the  earliest  times  the  husband  who  apprehended  his  wife  zVi 
Jlagrajite  was  allowed  to  kill  her'''  and  to  avenge  himself  on  the 
adulterer  according  to  his  pleasure.  The  same  right  was  accorded 
to  the  wile's  father.  They  were,  however,  obliged  to  kill  both 
parties  or  neither.  ''  The  Lex  Julia  of  Augustus  allowed  only 
the  father  to  kill  both  or  neither  under  certain  conditions,  while 
the  liusband  could  not  kill  his  wife  under  any  condition,  and  the 
adulterer  only  when  he  wdspcrsoiia  infainis,  inhonesia,  or  vitior.^^^ 

343  Dion  Hal.,  Antiq.  Rojfi.  \\\\,'6()\  ix,  40;  Plutarch,  Quaest.  Rom.  83; 
Livy,  xxii,  57,  4  sq.:  "  Hoc  nrfas  cum  inter  tot,  ut  fit,  clades  in  prodigium 
versiim  t-sset,  dt'cemviri  libio.-  adiie  iussi  sunt,  et  O.  Fabius  Pictor  Delphos 
ad  oraculiini  missus  est  sciscitatiim,  quibiis  precibus  suppliciisque  decs 
possent  placare,  et  quaenam  futura  finis  tantis  cladibus  foret.  Interini  ex 
fatalibus  libris  sacrificia  aliquot  extraordinaria  facta." 

^■*-'  Cf.  Eusebuis,  Chron.  a.  2107.  — Cf.  on  this  subject  Rein,  Criminalrecht, 
pp.  876-S.  Rein,  //'/,/.,  p.  877,  foot  note,  quotes  Dion.  Hal.,  Antiq.  Roth,  ii,  69; 
Val.  Ahix.  viii,  i,  5;  St.  August.,  De  Civitate  Dei  x,  16;  Pliny,  Nat.  Hist. 
xxviii,  2,  for  the  story  that  the  Vestal  Fuccia  was  acquitted  of  the  charge 
through  a  miracle,  and  her  accuser  disai^peared  in  an  inexplicable  way.  For 
another  such  case  Rein  refers  to  Herod,  i,  10. 

■^■•^  For  the  possible  mythological  source  of  and  the  parallels  to  this  theme 
compare  above,  p.  64. 

'•^*Cf.  Aul.  (iell.  x,  23;    Seneca,  De  ira  i,  end. 

■'^"Cf.  Quintilian,  Inst.  Orat.  v,  10,  104  ;    vii,  i,  6  sq.  ;    Decl.  277.  279.  284. 
-9'-  335-  347.  379  i   Calpurnius  I'laccns  46;    Seneca,  Contr.  ix,  i. 
Cf.    I'aiillu-^,  ii,  20,  I  sq.  ;     Rem,   Criminal:  .,   pp.  835-44. 


;>i- 


\ 


84 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


CoJity.  i.  5. 

Law  :  A  ravished  woman  may  choose  either  tlie  death  of  the 
ravisher  or  marriage  without  a  dowry. 

A  man  ravished  two  maidens  in  the  same  night :  one  demanded 
his  death,  the  other  marriage.^*'-* 

In  the  Lex  Julia  de  :i  rape  is  considered  as  :/>■.  and  was  at  first 
punished  with  aquae  ct  i^nis  infcniictio,  afterward  with  exile. 
Later  capital  punishment  was  inflicted,  but  this  was  unusual.  " 

Co)itr.  iii,  2. 

Parricida  acquis  smtentiis  absolutus. 

A  certain  man  accused  his  son  of  an  attempt  at  parricide. 
When  the  judges  were  equally  divided  in  opinion,  the  young  man 
was  acquitted.     Whert-upon  his  father  disinherited  him. 

In  ancient  times  a  special  commission  {quac^torcs)  w.is  ap- 
pointed, at  first  by  the  kings,  in  the  republican  epoch  by  the 
people,  to  judge  cases  of  parricide.'  '  The  penalty  was  drowning 
in  a  sack.^''  The  Lex  Cornelia  dc  sicariis  mentions  parricide. 
The  Lex  Pompeia  treats  especially  de  parricidis ;  it  defines  as 
parricide  "Qui  patrem,  matrem,  avum,  aviam,  fratrem,  sororem, 
patronum,  patronam  occiderit."'" 

The  punishment  of  the  cideus''-"  was  retained  tor  the  murder  of 
parents  and  grandparents  ;  lorthe  murder  of  other  relations  aquae 
et  ignis  interdictio  was  decreed.  The  Lex  Pompeia  threatened 
attempted  parricide  {e.  g,  the  preparation  of  poison)  in  the  same 
manner  as  if  it  were  accomplished.  The  crime  must  be  absolute 
and  manifest.  The  Lex  Pompeia  remained  in  torce  under  the 
emperors.  For  the  culeus  there  was  sometimes  substituted  burn- 
ing, or  throwinor  to  wild  beasts.''"' 

^■^^Cf.  above,  p.  64. 

■*50Cf.  Rein,  Critfimalr.,    pp.  S6S  scj. 

3^1  Cf.  Pomp.,  2,  §  32  ;    1).  de  orig.  iur.  1.  2. 

352  Cf.  Ad  HercH.   i,  13;    Livy,  A//'.  Ixviii  ;   Orosius,  v,   16. 

353  Cf.  PauUus,  V,  25. 

3**Cf.  Modestinus,  1.  q.  pr.  D.  h.  t.  :  "Poena  parr,  more  niaiorun\  haec 
instituti  est,  ut  parricida  virgis  sanguineis  (;.  f.  red)  verberatus,  deiiule 
culeo  (of  leather,  cf.  Juvenal,  xiii,  155)  insuatur  cum  cane,  gallo,  galhna  et 
vipera  et  simia,  deinde  in  mare  profundum  culeus  iactetur"  ;  c'icero,  Ros,. 
Amer.  25.26,  69-72;  <^aint.,  Did.  299;  Ad  Iic'>cn.  i.  13;  Cicero,  /V 
im'ent.  ii,  50,  149. 

■'*'  Cf.  Rein,  Crimmalr.,  pp.  449-63. 


I 


r 


THE    THEMES    TRiAli:!)    UY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


8; 


Conir,  iii,  8. 

Olynthius  pat^r  reus  concursus. 

Law:  Let  it  be  a  capital  offence  to  make  a  meeting  and  assembly. 
Alter  the  conquest  of  Olynthus  an  aged  Olynthian  came  to 
Athens  with  his  youthful  son.  The  Athenians  decreed  citizen- 
ship to  all  the  Olynthians.  Having  been  invited  to  dinner  by  a 
voluptuous  young  man  the  old  man  came  with  his  son.  When 
a  suggestion  was  made  of  debauching  llie  son,  the  father  fled 
while  the  young  man  was  forcibly  retained.  The  father  began  to 
lament  before  the  house  ;  the  house  was  burned  ;  ten  voung  men 
perished,  among  them  the  son  of  the  Olynthian.  The  father  is 
charged  with  holding  an  assembly. 

For  the  import  and  the  legal  aspects  of  the  coetiis.  compare 
Livy,  ii,  28,  i  :  "  Tum  xaxo  plebs  incerta,  quales  habitura  consules 
esset,  coetus  nocturnos,  })ars  Esquiliis,  pars  in  Aventino,  facere, 
ne  in  foro  subitis  trepidaret  consiliis,  et  omnia  temere  ac  fortuito 
ageret  ";  32,  i  :  "  Timor  inde  patres  incessit,  ne  si  dimissus  exer- 
citus  foret,  rursus  coetus  occulti  coniurationesque  fierent  ";  cf.  also 
XXX,  15;  xxxix,  15.  The  Declamation  aj>ainst  Catiline,  which  is 
ascribed  to  M.  Porcius  Latro,  mentions  the  alleged  ordinance  of 
the  Twelve  Tables  :  "  Ne  quis  in  urbe  coetus  nocturnos  agitaret," 
and  the  Lex  Gabinia  declares  :  'Qui  conciones  ullas  clandestinas  in 
urbe  conflavisset,  more  maiorum  capitali  supplicio  multaretur." 
Compare  also  Cicero,  Pro  Su/la,  5,  15  :  "  Ule  ambitus  iudicium 
tollere  ac  disturl)are  primum  conflato  voluit  gladiatorum  ac  fugi- 
tivorum  tumuliu,  deinde  id  quod  vidimus  omnes,  lapidatione 
atque  concursu." — Rein,    Cri77iiualr.,  pp.  473.  520  sq. 

Contr.  iv,  i. 

Pater  a  sepulchris  a  luxurioso  raptus. 

While  a  certain  man  who  had  lost  three  children  was  sitting  by 
their  tomb,  he  was  carried  away  forcibly  by  his  wanton  son  to 
some  near-by  garden  where,  having  been  shaven  and  his  clothing 
changed,  he  was  compelled  to  take  part  in  a  banquet.  When 
released  he  brings  an  action  for  iniuria. 

The  action  of  this  controversia  comes  under  the  heading  of 
iniuria  status  iibertaiis.'^'-'- 


.■556 


Cf.  Rein,  Ki'^ni series  Priiat^-ccJit^  p.  348. 


86 


TiiE   THEMES    TREATED    BY   THE   ELDER   SENECA. 


Contr.  iv,  4. 
Armis  se[)ulohri    victor. 
Law:   Let  there  bt-  an  action  <it  law  tor  the  viohilion  <>f  ;i  ton.b. 
Durino  a  war  in  a  certain  stale  a  valiant  man,   having   lost  his 
arms  in  battle,  took  other  arms   troni    the  tomb  ol^  a   hero.      Me 
fought  bravely  and  replaced  the  arms.     At'ter  receiving  a  reward 
he  is  charged  with  violation  ot  a  tomb. 

For  the  legal  aspects  of  this  theme,  compare  Aynm.  .Ifarr.  xvi,  8; 
Cass.  Var.  iv,  18.  Un  ier  the  emperors  srpulchri  violatio  was  a 
crimen  extraordinan'um.  and  was  severely  punished;  dtS})oiling 
corpses,  if  done  7?ia7iu  armata,  capitc:  \i  sine  armis.  condnn- 
7iaiione  ad  jneialla.^  ' 

Contr.  iv,  8. 
Patronus  operas  remi>sas  reprtens. 
Law:    Let  what   is   etfected  by   violence   and    intimidation   be 

invalid. 

A  patron  defeated  in  a  civil  war  and  proscribed,  threw  himself 
on  the  protection  ot  a  Ircedman.  He  was  received  by  him.  and 
asked  to  give  up  all  claim  to  his  servict-s.  The  patron  gave  up 
his  claims  with  a  signed  renunciation.  When  he  was  restored  to 
his  position  he  demanded  the  services.      The   freedman   protests. 

In  this  theme  may  be  a  suggestion  ol  the  laithtul  Tyndarus  in 
the  Captivi  of  Plautus. 

The  liberties  was  obliged  to  assume  the  name  of  his  tormer 
master  {patronus)  and  if  he  died  without  issue  the  patronus  became 
his  heir.  The  patronus  could  also,  like  a  tather,  claim  obedience 
and  respect  from  the  libertus,  and  the  latter  was  compelled  to 
fulfil  what  he  had  promised  at  his  manumission— ^/(';/^?,  munera, 
bona,  operae.  He  was  even  obliged  to  confirm  these  promises  by 
oath  after  the  manumission.'" 

CoJitr.  V,  I. 
Laqueus  incisus. 
Law:  Let  there  be  an  action  at  law  on  a  charge  of  malicious 

injury  not  in  the  code. 

'^^'  Cf.  Rein,  Crivtnuilr.,  pp.  SSqq  sq. 

3i^Cf.  Rein,  Romisches  I'rivatr.,  pp.  2S5  sq.  On  the  insolence  of  the 
freedmen  and  on  the  two  kinds  ot  manumission  (one  bv  the  praetor  winch 
conferred  all  the  rights  of  a  Knnuni  citi/en,  tlie  otlur  l)v  tlie  writing  or 
declaration  of  the  mastei,  wiiich  convt\ci:  a  degree  of  liberty,  but  did  not 
give  the  freed  rank  amone,  the  citizen-^),  cf.  Tacitu-^.  Attn,  .xiii,  20,  27. 


^ 


<#  ^^ 


I    r 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


87 


A  certain  man,  having  suffered  shipwTeck  and  having  lost  his 
wife  and  three  children  by  the  burning  of  his  house,  hanged  him- 
seli.  A  certain  one  of  the  passers-by  cut  him  down,  and  was 
brought  to  trial  l)y  the  man  he  had  saved  on  a  charge  of  malicious 
injury. 

Suicide  was  not  considered  by  the  Romans  as  a  crime.  On  the 
contrary  it  is  commended  by  Roman  writers. ^'^  Nevertheless 
hanging  one's  self  seems  to  have  been  at  all  times  considered  as 
an  ignominious  mode  of  death  and  to  have  entailed  the  loss  of 
honorable  buriaL'"*" 

Contr.  V,  4. 

Damnatus  parricidi  alligans  fratrem. 

Law:  Let  the  man  who  has  given  false  testimony  be  bound 
under  the  control  of  him  against  whom  he  has  testified. 

A  lather  went  away  with  one  of  his  two  sons;  the  young  man 
returned  alone.  He  was  accused  of  parricide  by  his  brother  and 
condemned.  On  account  of  an  intervening  festival  the  punish- 
ment, in  accordance  with  the  law,  was  postponed,  and  the  father 
returned.  The  one  convicted  accused  his  brother  of  giving  false 
witness  and  seized  and  confined  him.  His  father  commanded 
him  to  release  his  brother  and  upon  his  refusal  disinherited  him. 

Faisum  testimonium  according  to  the  Twelve  Tables  was  pun- 
ished by  hurling  iVom  the  Tarpeian  rock.^"' 

Contr.  V,  5. 

Domus  cum  arbore  exusta. 

Law:  Let  the  man  who  has  knowingly  inflicted  an  injury  pay 
fourlold,  the  man  who  did  so  without  knowing,  the  simple 
amount. 

A  rich  man  asked  his  poor  neighbor  to  sell  him  a  tree  which 
he  said  was  in  his  way.  The  poor  man  refused.  The  rich  man 
set  fire  to  the  plane-tree,  with  which  the  house  also  burned.  For 
the  tree  he  promises  tourfold,  for  the  house  the  simple  value. 

^5''Cf  '^Qx\tz2.,  De  prozidiutia  2,3;  Consol.  ad  Marc.  22;  Tacitus,  Anfi. 
vi.  29,  30  ;  xii,  59  ;  xiii,  30  ;  Hist,  ii,  49  ;  Pliny,  Epist.  i,  12,  22  ;  iii,  7,  16; 
Cicero,  De pji.  iii,  iS. 

^*'"  Cf.  Rein,  Criminalr.,  pp.  883-6  ;  Servius  ad  Verg.,  Aen.  xii,  603  ;  Orelli, 
Inscr.  .^404. 

■^''' Cf.  Rein,  Crnninalr..  pp.  767.788  sq.;  Gellius,  Noct.  Att.  xx,  T. 
Cases  of  action  for  this  crime,  Livy,  iii,  24  sq.,  29  ;  iv,  21. 


88 


THE    TTTEMES    TREATED    P.V    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


A  law  of  the  Twelve  Tables  provides  that  the  illej^^al  destruction 
of  other  people's  fruit  trees  or  vines  shall  be  paid  for  at  the  rate  of 
twenty -five  asses  for  each  tree.^'" 

Cojiir.  vi,  2. 

Exul  pater  fundo  prohibitus. 

Laws  :  Let  it  be  unlawful  to  aid  an  exile  with  shelter  and  food. 
Let  the  man  condemned  for  accidental  manslaughter  be  exiled  tor 
five  years. 

A  certain  man  who  had  a  son  and  a  daughter,  being  contlenuied 
for  accidental  manslaughter  and  having  gone  into  exile,  was  in  the 
habit  of  coming  to  an  estate  near  the  boundary.  His  son  discov- 
ering this  punished  the  bailif  The  bailif  shut  out  the  father  who 
thereupon  began  to  visit  his  daughter.  She  was  accused  oi 
having  harbored  an  exile  Init  was  acquitted  by  the  adx'ocacy  ot 
her  brother.     After  the  live  years  the  lather  disinherits  the  son. 

Exilhan  was  the  prohibition  of  residence  in  a  certain  country 
or  city,  with  a  command  to  live  in  a  certain  place.  During  the 
epoch  of  the  kings  and  in  the  republican  period  it  comprised 
voluntary  banishment  as  well  as  the  penal  aquae  ct  i^^^nis  ijito  dictio. 
In  the  times  of  the  emperors  this  latter  })assed  over  into  the 
deportatio.  Deportatio  was  for  lit'e,  and  entailed  the  loss  ot  ciiiias 
and  confiscation  of  property.  Alongside  of  this  severe  torm  ot 
banishment  there  was  inflicted  a  milder  degree,  the  icic^aiio, 
which  was  not  followed  by  loss  of  civitas  and  confiscation.  The 
five  grades  of  banishment  were  :  i)i  iyisidam  deportatio  ;  depor- 
tatio ;  in  insiiiani  relei^atio  ;  in  perpciuum  relei^^atio  ;  in  ienipus 
relegatio.^'^''^ 

Contr.  vi,  3. 

Mater  nothi  lecta  pro  patre. 

Laws  :  Let  the  elder  brother  divide  the  patrimony,  the  younger 
take  his  choice.  Let  it  be  lawful  to  acknowledge  a  son  by  a 
bondwoman. 

A  certain  man  having  a  legitimate  son,  acknowledged  another 
by  a  bondwoman  and  died.  The  elder  brother  made  such  a 
division  that  the  whole  patrimony  was  placed  on  one  side  and  on 
the  other  the  mother  of  the  illegitimate  son.  The  younger  brother 
chose  his  mother,  and  accused  his  brother  of  detrauding  him. 

•'*-Cf.  Rein,  6>/////«u/r.,  p.  33 '^;    Pliny,   Xat.  Hist,   xviii,  i  ;    Gaius,   Covi- 
vientary  to  the   Tiuehe   I'aiucs  iv,  11. 
^^^  Cf.  Rein,  Crirnmair.,  p.  915. 


^ 


\ 


k 


f 


r 


1  if 


TIIF.    TIIKMES    TREATED    DY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


89 


The  "  circumscriptio  "  of  this  case  might  come  under  sielliona- 
tns,  which  implied  the  taking  of  advantage  in  regard  to  property 
without  necessarily  coming  under  doliun  ox  fiirtuju."'"^ 

Contr.  vi,  5. 

Iphicrates  reus. 

Law  :  Let  whosoever  ofiers  violence  in  a  court  of  justice  be 
liable  to  capit.il  punishment. 

Iphicrates  having  been  sent  against  the  King  of  the  Thracians 
after  being  thrice  defeated  in  battle  concluded  a  treaty  with  him 
and  married  his  daughter.  When  he  had  returned  to  Athens 
and  was  on  his  trial  certain  Thracians  armed  with  knives  appeared 
about  the  court,  and  the  detendant  himself  drew  his  sword.  When 
the  judges  were  summoned  to  give  their  decision  they  publicly 
voted  lor  an  acquittal.  Iphicrates  is  accused  ot  oflfering  violence 
in  a  court  of  justice.^^ 

A[)pearance  in  the  court  or  in  the  contio  wMth  arms  for  an  evil 
pur|>ose  came  under  the  Lex  Julia,'"^^'' under  vis pnbiica  (in  distinc- 
tion   trom   vis  privata)   which    was   |)unished  by   aquae  et   i^nis 

interdictio:'"'' 

Contr.  vi,  6. 

Adultera  venefica. 

Law  :   Let  there  be  an  action  at  law  tor  poisoning. 

A  certain  man  who  liad  a  wife  and  a  marriageable  daughter  by 
her  intormed  his  wife  to  whom  he  was  intending  to  betroth  the 
daughter.  The  wife  said  :  "  She  shall  die  sooner  than  marry  that 
man."  The  girl  died  before  the  marriage  day  with  suspicious 
signs  of  cruelty  and  poison.  The  father  put  a  maid-servant  to 
the  torture.  She  said  she  knew  nothing  about  poison  but  she  did 
know  of  the  adultery  of  her  mistress  with  him  to  whom  the  father 
intended  to  betroth  his  daughter.  The  man  charges  his  wife  with 
poisoning  and  adultery. 

The  earliest  punishment  for  murder  by  poisoning  as  related  by 
Livy,  •■  took   place   332   B.    C.     The  most  prominent  men  died 

3«^  Cf.  Rein,  Criminalr.,  pp.  331  sq.  Rein  says  that  the  Roman  defi- 
nition i)f  stellii)n.i:us  was  quite  indctinite. 

"'  i-\)r  the  historical  basis  of  this  Controver>ia  see  above,  p.  66  sq. 
'**'*'  Mentioned  in  Cicero,  r/iil.  i,  9  sq. 
3^' Cf.  Rein,  Cnvunah  .,  pp.  745.  750. 
3*^viii,  18,  2  sqq.,  where  it  is,  iiowever  given  as  a  tradition. 


I 


90 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


mysteriously^'"''  until  n  miid-servnnt  revealed  to  the  aedile  <,). 
Fabius  Maxiinus  the  tact  that  women  ot'  hi^^h  position  ut  re  pre- 
pariiiiT  and  ilistributini^^  poison.  With  the  consent  ot  the  senate 
the  matter  was  followed  up,  and  a  nn:ni)er  oi  wonicr,  were  tound 
engao-ed  in  the  {)reparati()n  ul"  ptjison.  Wlicn  thf\-  were  com- 
pelled to  drink  their  own  preparations  tucnt\-  ot"  them  (iicci,  and 
in  the  pursuance  ot  the  investit^ation  al)out  one  hun(h-c(i  and 
seventy  were  condemned.  (The  manner  oi"  pnu'slmu-nt  is  not 
recorded.)  The  at^air  was  also  considered  as  a  pyodi'^iu7}i 
requiring  expiation,  and  a  dictator  was  chosen  tlaii  fi^^oidi 
causa  f'^ 

In  1S4  H.  C.  the  [)raetor  Q.  Naevins  sat  in  iudonicnt  on  nun-ders 
by  poison  which  otten  occurred  in  the  country  towns  about  Rome, 
and  according  to  Valerius  Antias  two  thousand  people  were 
found  guilty.''^  Two  years  later  on  the  sudden  death  of  C.  Cal- 
purnius  Piso  and  other  prominent  men  a  sus{>icion  of  poisi^ning 
arose,  and  by  a  senatus  consultum  tl^e  praetor  C.  Chiudms  was 
given  charge  ot  the  quatsiio  concernin^i;  murch  rs  bv  ])o;son  in  the 
city  and  vicinity,  and  the  praetor  C.  Maenius  the  quaesiio  outside. 
Of  those  condemned  in  the  city  only  Quarta  Hostilia,  the  wife  of 
the  nuudered  consul,  is  mentioned.  Her  ouiit  was  pro\  ed  by 
numerous  witnesses.'''  C.  M.ienius  tound  so  much  to  do  outside 
the  city  that  he  wrote  to  the  senate  that  he  h.id  aireadv  condemned 
three  thousand  persons  and  that  the  numljer  of  the  suspects  was 
constantly  growing  in  consequence  of  new  informations.  In  the 
following  year  the  praetor  urbanus  P.  Mucins  Scaevohi  held  an 
investigation  of  cases  of  murder  l)v  poison  in  the  citv  and 
vicinity.'''  investigations  were  a^ain  held  at  the  time  of  the  third 
Punic  war,  and  two  i)r();nincnt  matrons,  Publia  the  wife  of 
Postinnius  Albinus,  and  Licinia  thewite  of  Clautiius  Asel]u>,  were 
accused  of  having  poisoned  their  husbands,  and  ])ut  to  death  l)y 
the  sentence  of  a  family  court  {iudiciiun  domcsiiciu?i).'' 

The  last  accusation  tor  poisoning  recorded  |)rior  to  the  Lex 
Cornelia  is  that  of  Q.  Varius  Flybrida,  known  through  the  Lex 
Varia.      He  was  executed  "  summo  cruciatu  supplicioque."'' 

^*'*"Cum  primores  civitatis  s;mili!)us  n^^rbis  eodeiiuiue  ferme  nmiics 
eveiitu  niorerentur." 

^™Cf.  Valer.  Max.,  ii,  5,  3;   Urosius.  iii,  10. 

^"'  Cf.  Livy,  xxxix,  41.  ^'--'Cf.  ;•.'./.  xl,  37.  373  cf.  thJ.  xl,  .^3  sq. 

3-4  ».  Cognatoriini  decreto  ncctae  sunt."  Ci.  Livv,  A.>./.  xlviii  ;  \'altr. 
Max.,  vi,  3,  S. 

^'^Cf.  Cicero,  Dc  fiat.  deor.  iii,  33,  Si. 


'.* 


. 


i         \ 


\ 


J    r ) 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


91 


Durino  the  civil  war  between  Marius  and  Sulla  with  otiier  evils 
and  crimes,  ijoisoning  also  increased.'''  Sulla  endeavored  to 
check  these  evils  l)y  his  Lex  (hence  called  Cornelia)  de  sicariis  et 
veneficis.  The  tilth  division  treats  of  murder  by  poisoning,  and 
declares  that  the  praetor  or  iudex  quaestionis  shall  judoe  "  qui- 
cumque  lecerit,  vendiderit.  emerit,  dederit  (sc.  venenum)."^"'  The 
penaltv,  as  also  for  other  kinds  of  murder  and  arson,  was  aquae 
et  ii^mis  inierdiciio  for  freemen  and  death  for  slaves.''' 

In  the  imperial  period  the  punishment  for  murder  was  more 
severe  :  deportaiio  in  insulam  for  altiores,  execution  for  Jionesiiores, 
while  humiliores  were  thrown  to  the  wild  beasts  or  put  on  the 
cross.  A  senatus  consultum  extended  the  compass  of  "  venenum," 
and  punished  all  those  who  used  a  7?iedica77ie7iiuni  through  which 
the  life  or  health  of  the  person  taking  it  was  endangered  (?.  e. 
medicines  to  bring  about  conception  or  abortion). 

Under  Augustus  three  accusations  of  murder  by  poison  are 
recorded:  against  Moschus  a  rhetor  of  Pergamus,  who  was 
defended  by  Asinius  Pollio  and  C.  Manlius  ;'"'  against  Apollo- 
dorus,  also  a  rhetor  o(  Pergamus,  who  was  detended  by  the  same 
Asinius  Pollio.  Apollodorus  was  condemned,  and  went  into  exile 
at  Massilia  f'  against  Nonius  Asprenas,  a  friend  of  Augustus,  who 
was  accused  by  Cassius  Severus  of  poisoning  one  hundred  and 
thirty  guests.     He  was  likewise  defended  by  Asinius  Pollio.'"^ 

Udder  Tiberius  occurred  the  poisoning  of  Germanicus  in  19 
A.  D.  bv  Cn.  Piso  and  his  wife  Piancina  perhaps  not  without  the 
connivance  of  the  emperor  who  was  jealous  of  Germanicus. 
Before  his  death  Germanicus  demanded  that  his  friends  should 
become  the  accusers  of  Piso.  The  senate  conducted  the  investi- 
gation and  Cn.  Piso,  despairing  of  the  result,  committed  suicide. 
Piancina  was  at  first  pardoned  at  the  intercession  of  the  Empress 
Agrippina,  but  after  the  death  of  the  latter  in  33  A.  D.  she  was 

3''H'f.  Cicero,  /';<)  Clucutto  54. 

S"?"  Commonly  abbreviated  :   Lex  CorneHa  de  Sicariis. 

37^  Cf.  Cicero,  Pro  Cluait.  54. 

3"'''  Cf.  ;/'/</.  71. 

a^'Cf.  Horace,  Kpnt.  i  5,  9,  and  Porphyrion  ad  loc. 

3*^'  Cf.  Seneca,  Contr.  ii,  5.   13. 

3--Cf.  Plinv,  His(.  Xat.  xxxv,  12  ;   Suetonius,  Octav.  56;  Quintilian,  Ijist. 

Orat.  X,  I,  22  ;   xi,  1,  57. 


V 


I 


92 


TIIK    THLMES    TRLATKD    ilV    TilJ-:    i;i.I)!;u    SEXFXW, 


again  accused  and  likewise  committed  suicide.'''  The  poisonino 
of  Drusus  the  son  of  Tit)erius  took  phice  at  the  instigation  of 
Sejanus  by  the  eunuch  Lyodus,  with  the  knowledge  ot  Drnsiis's 
wite  Livia  or  Livilla.  The  affair  remained  for  a  time  douhttui  and 
obscure  until  Apicata.  the  wife  of  Sejanus,  after  the  execution  of 
her  husband,  betrayed  all  in  a  letter  to  Tiberius.  An  action  fol- 
lowed :  Eudemus  and  Lyi^^dns  wiun  tortured  confessed  everything, 
and  all  the  participants  in  the  crime  were  executed  m  ^r  A  D.'" 

The  Emperor  Claudius,  who  committed  many  murders,  was  at 
last  himself  poisoned  by  his  wife  Ai;rippina.     The  {)oison  wa,>  pre- 
pared   by  the  notorious    Lociista,  and    the    physician    Xenophon 
completed   the   deed.   "    Aori|)j)ina  also   caused   the   poisoning  of 
Junius    Silanus,    proconsul    in    Asia,    In-    P.    Cel^r    and     lletius ; 
another  of  her  victims  was  Narcissus  tlu-  h-eedman  of  Claudius."' 
Locusta  also  assisted  in  the  poisonini^  of  Brittanicus  by  Nero  in  55 
B.  C.     She    had  been   condemned    loni;  bef  )re,  but  on  account  of 
her   great  skill    was  kept   in  custody  and  forced  lo  be  the  tool  of 
prominent  persons.'"' Nero  also  caused  the  treednien   I)ory{)horus 
and  Pallas  to  be  poisoned.''"' 

It  may  be  noted  that  under  Domitian  poisoning  was  verv  fre- 
quent, especially  by  means  of  poisoned  needles.'''' 

Conlr.  vi,  7. 

Demens  qui  filio  cessit  uxorem. 
Law  :     Let  there  be  an  action  at  law  for  madness. 
A  man  having  two  sons  married  a  second  wile.     When  one  of 

38»Cf.  Tacitus,  .-^;/;;.  ii,  69-S2  ;  ill,  lO-lS;  vi,  26;  I)i(,  CasMus.  Ivii.  iS  ; 
Suetonius,  Tihcr.  52;  VitelL  2;  Cali<^.  1.2;  I'linv,  lf:st.  X.it.  xi.  ^7  ;  Znn- 
aeus,  xi,  2.  la  Tacitus  Ami.  iii,  iz  sq.  it  )s  related  that  Emilia  l.cpida, 
who  was  charged  with  feigning  that  she  iiad  given  birth  to  a  child  ]>v  Tul)- 
has  Quirinus  her  husband,  and  was  further  charged  with  adulteries,  i)oison- 
ings,  and  treasonaole  dealings  with  the  Chaldeans  about  the  fate  and 
continuance  of  the  imperial  house,  was  interdicted  from  tire  and  water  ; 
ibid,  iv,  22  it  is  stated  that  Xumantina  was  accused  of  having,  by  cb.aniis  and 
potions,  disordered  the  brain  of  her  husband. 

Ct.    1  acitus,  Ann.  iv,  S-i  {  ;    Dio  ("assius  h  li,  22  ;   Iviii,   11. 

3S^Cf.  Tacitus,  Ann.  xii,  66  sq;  Dio  Cassius,  Ix,  34;  Suetonius,  Claud. 
44  sq. 

3®«Cf.  Tacitus,  Ann.  xiii,  i  ;    Dio  Cassius,  Ixi.  6. 

Ut.    iacitus,  Ann.  xiii,  15  sq.;    Dio  Cassius,  Ixi,  7  ;    Suetonius,  .\V;c'  33 

3*^Cf.  Tacitus,  Ann.  xiv,  65. 

3S^Cf.  Dio  Cassius,  Ixvii.  u.  On  this  whole  subject  comi)are  Rein, 
Crimmalr.,  pp.  406-S.  410.  414.  419.  426  sq. 


THE  TIIl-.MKS  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SEXECA. 


93 


'        f 


( 


/   ^ 


I 


the  voung  men  was  ill  nigh  unto  death  the  physicians  said  that 
the  cause  of  his  illness  was  a  mental  trouble.  When  the  father 
compelled  the  son  at  the  sword's  point  to  tell  him  the  truth  the 
young  man  confessed  that  he  loved  his  step-mother.  The  father 
gave  up  his  wife  to  him,  and  thereupon  was  charged  with  insanity 
by  his  other  son.  '"^ 

The  Twelve  Tables  place  a  mature  person  of  unsound  mind 
under  the  care  of  his  kinsmen  iag7iaii)  or  where  he  has  none 
under  that  of  his  gens  {^oitilcs):''^ 

Contr.  vii,  7. 

Law  :     Let  there  be  an  action  at  law^  for  treason. 

A  father  and  son  desired  military  command  ;  the  son  was  pre- 
ferred over  the  father,  and  having  engaged  in  battle  with  the 
enemy  was  captured.  An  embassy  of  ten  was  sent  to  ransom 
the  commander.  While  they  were  on  their  way  the  father  met 
them  with  gold,  and  informed  them  that  his  son  had  been  crucified, 
and  that  he  himself  had  carried  the  gold  for  his  ransom  too  late. 
When  they  reached  the  crucified  commander  he  said  to  them  : 
"  Beware  of  treason."     The  lather  is  accused  of  treason. 

Proditio  consists  in  i.  Treacherous  or  cowardly  surrender  ol 
territory  or  people  to  the  enemy.  2.  Desertion.  3.  Going  over  to 
the  enemv.  4.  Inciting  a  foreign  enemy  to  war  against  Rome. 
5.  Probably  any  support  of  the  enemy  (with  arms,  money,  release 
of  hostages,  etc.).  The  punishment  was  death,  including  hanging 
on  the  arbor  iufelix,  hurling  from  the  Tarpeian  rock''''"  and  exe- 
tion  with  the  axe.  ''  \x\  the  time  of  the  emperors  the  davinatio 
memoriae,''  consisting   of  tearing   down   the  house  of  the  con- 

3^  For  the  historical  suggestion  in  this  theme,  and  the  parallels  to  it,  see 

above,  p.  67. 

;''"  Cf.  Rem.  /V/r'<7/r.,  pp.  259  sq.;  Ad  Ilcren.  i,  13;  Cicero,  Tusc.  Disp. 
iii,  5  ;  Dc  :n:\  ii,  50  :  "  Si  furiosus  est  agnatorum  gentiliumque  in  eo  pecu- 
niaque  eiu>  potestas  csto  ;  "  Varro,  De  re  rust,  i,  2  :  "  Mente  est  captus 
atqae  ad  agnatos  et  gentiles  est  dediicendum."  Rein  remarks  that  no  great 
stress  1-  ti)  be  laid  on  the  various  expressions,  as  they  have  no  legal  import- 
ance,  as  every  person  of  unsound  mind,  whether //^r/*?^?^^-  ox  demens,  was 
placed  under  cm  atio. 

■-'Cf.  L;vv,  vii,  20,  12;   Dion.  Hal.,  Rom.  ^////V/.  viii,  78  ;   Seneca,  Z^i?  zVa: 

i,  16, 

-*«•*  Ct.  Livy,  ii,  5,  S  ;   41,9;   viii,  20,  8  ;   x,  i  ;    Dion  Hal.,  Rom.  Antiq.s,  8. 

39tCl.  ^^)uintilian,  Ins!.  Oral,  iii,  7,  20:   "  post  mortem  adiecta  quibusdam 
ignominia  est." 


94 


THE  lilEML:;  1  SEATED  LV  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


95 


victed,"  was  a  n  >t  uncommon  occurrence.  Somctinu's  also  coni- 
mand  was  -^ivcn  that  no  neinber  ot  the  tainily  shoiikl  bear  the 
name  ot"  the  criminal/"'  nor  were  his  relations  allowed  to  mourn 
for  him.  His  property  also  was  conhscated.  '"  The  Lex  Julia  de 
rnaiesiate,  issued  l)v  Caesar,  prescribed  the  same  penalty  of 
aquae  et  i!:;n:s  inicrdictio  for  all  kinds  of  treason.^^* 

Contr.  viii,  i. 

Orbata  post  la(|ueum  sacrile^a. 

Law:  Let  a  mao;istrate  inflict  punishment  on  one  who  has 
confessed  i^uilt. 

A  woman  havino-  lost  her  husband  and  two  s(ms  hani^ed  her- 
self, but  a  third  son  cut  her  down.  She,  when  a  sacrilege  had 
been  committed,  and  the  per[)etrator  was  bein^  souj^ht  lor,  told 
the  magistrate  that  she  was  the  i^uilty  party.  The  ma-^isirate 
wishes  to  inflict  punishment  on  her  on  the  i^jround  of  her  contes- 
sion.     The  son  protests. 

Sacrilei^iuin  was  a  term  at  first  applied  to  the  despoilini^  of  a 
temple,  the  theft  of  sacred  objects.  In  the  imperial  period  the 
term  was  given  a  wider  sco[)e,  embracing  anv  outrage  on  religion, 
any  wicked  deed  which  implied  a  violation  of  the  sacred  and 
moral  order,  especially  lack  of  respect  toward  the  emperor, 
heresy,  disturbance  of  worship,  etc.  I'Acn  in  the  earlier  [)eriod, 
however,  sacrilegium  in  the  wider  sense  was  prohibited  and 
regarded  as  an  act  deserving  the  severest  punishment.  Ol  great 
importance  in  regard  to  this  crime  was  the  Lex  Julia  pccidatiis 
(i.  e.  the  unlawful  appropriation  of  public  pro{)erty ).  It  read: 
"  Ne  quis  ex  pecunia  sacra  religiosa  publicave  auterat,  neve  inter- 
cipiat  neve  in  rem  suam  vestat."     Compare  also  the  definition  of 

3*^  Cf.  //'/</. :  "utMaeho,  cuius  domus  solo  acquata  "  ;  Livy,  viii,  2C,  8; 
Cicero,  Pro  domo  38. 

;i6  (jf_  (^uintilian,  /.  c.  :  "  Marcoque  Manlio,  cuius  praenonit"n  a  famiiia 
in  posteriorem  exeniptum  est";   Tacitus,  Aim.  ii,  32. 

^^''*"  Cf.  Rein,  Crimmalr.,  pp.  475-7. 

3^^  Cf.  ibid.^  pp.  51S  sq.  A  specialization  of  the  law  on  treason  under  the 
;rors  is  illustrated  by  tiie  actions  at   law  descril)ed   in    Tacitus,   Ann.  i. 


1        k 


1 


t 


I 


I   "  r 


Seneca  in  De  beneficiis  vii,  7  :  "  Quisquis  id,  quod  deorum  est, 
sus:ulu  et  consiunpsit  atque  m  usum  suum  vertit,  sacrilegus  est." 
The  law  also  prohibited  the  violation  of  the  walls  which  belonged 
to  the  res  sanctae  ;■"  also  to  scale  and  cross  over  the  city  wall  by 
means  of  a  ladder,  which  was  considered  a  hostile  action  and 
unworthy  of  a  Roman  citizen.  On  the  other  hand  the  plundering 
of  temples  in  an  enemy's  land  was  considered  lawful."'^"  The 
j)enaity  in  the  Lex  Julia  for  sacrilege  was  aquae  et  ignis  iyiter- 
diciio  which  however  was  soon  replaced  by  deportaiio.  Under 
imi)erial  rule  there  was  introduced  a  variety  of  punishments.  The 
dd)nnatio  ad  besiias  and  less  often  burning  alive  were  inflicted  on 
those  "qui  manu  facta  templum  effregerunt  et  dona  dei  noctu 
tulerunt."  "  Si  quis  interdiu  modicum  aliquid  de  templo  tulit," 
the  guilty  one  was  condemned  ad  7neialla,  and  when  honesiiore 
loco  7iaius  to  deportatio,  although  in  this  case  also  the  death 
pen.ilty  might  be  inflicted.'^ 


4Ul 


Contr,  ix,  2. 
Law  :   Let  there  be  an  action  at  law  for  injuring  the  dignity  of 

the  state. 

The  proconsul  Flaminius  being  requested  at  dinner  by  a  cour- 
tesan who  said  that  she  had  never  seen  a  man  decapitated,  put  to 
death  one  of  those  condemned.  He  is  accused  of  injuring  the 
dignity  of  the  state."'" 

In  the  Lex  Cornelia  de  viaiestate  (z.  e.  actions  for  crimes  which 
tended  to  affect  and  diminish  the  majesty  and  dignity  of  the 
state)  was  included  the  conduct  of  a  magistrate  when  unmindful 
of  his  dignity  he  compromised  the  Roman  majesty."''  The 
penalty  was  as  \ox perdnellio,  aquae  et  ignis  inter didio.^^ 

s^'^Cf.  Cicero,  De  naf.  dear,  iii,  40,  94  :  "  Est  enim  mihi  tecum  pro  aris  et 
focis  certamen,  et  pro  deorum  templis  atque  delubris  proque  Urbis  muris, 
quos  vos,  pontifices,  sanctos  esse  dicitis.  ..."  Plutarch,  Quacst.  Rom,  c. 
27  :  "  -nv  -u\or  u.ii  i///.nv  ^a(  u puv  vo/j.iCovai  ";  Dion.  Hal.,  Antiq.  Rom.  i,  88  ; 
Isidorus,  xv,  4. 

•""'  Cf.  Seneca,  Epist.  87.  ^^^  Cf.  Rein,  Criminalr.,  pp.  691-4. 

•»'*^  For  the  historical  basis  of  this  Controversia  see  above,  p.  68. 

^"^  Cf.  Seneca,  Conir.  ix,  2,  14  :  "  in  eo  autem,  quod  sub  praetexto  publicae 
maiestatis  agitur,  quidquid  peccatur,  maiestatis  actione  vindicandum  est  ;  " 
ibid.  15:   ''Is  laedit  populi  Romani  maiestatem,  qui  aliquid  publico  nomine 

facit.  .  .  ." 

4»*  Cf.  Rein,  Criminalr.,  pp.  512.  525.  527  ;  Tacitus,  Ann.  iii,  38,  50  end: 
"  bonis  amissis  aqua  at  igni  arceatur,  quod  perinde  censeo  ac  si  legemaies- 
tatis  teneretur." 


96 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


97 


Conir.  ix,  3. 

Lnws  :  L"t  acts  effected  by  violence  .ind  iiitiniiflation  he  inxalid. 
— Let  agreements  accordingly  to  law  bf  valid.  —  \a-\  \\\\\\  wim  has 
recognized  .1  child  a  ho  has  been  exposed  t^ikt-  it  hai  k  a'trr 
paying  for  its  nurture. 

A  man  took  u[)  two  sons  who  had  been  exposed,  aiul  t diH  ated 
them.  When  their  n,)tiira1  father  suughl  lor  them  he  ] atomised 
that  he  would  sh«iw  where  thev  were  if  he  wonld  L;i\e  hiii]  one  of 
them.  The  agreement  is  made  whereupon  he  restores  the  two 
sons  asking  for  one. 

Bv  the  Roman  law  the  fither  (Originally  had  the  rieh.t  to  kill  or 
expose  the  newborn  chdd.  This  right  arose  trom  the  eustoni, 
common  in  anticjuitv,  ot  destroy ine  detormed  inlants.  lUu  this 
riglit  was  accorded  not  without  certain  linritati('n>.  Arrordino  to 
the  decision  ascribed  to  Roniidus,'  the  fatlicr  was  obhecd  Im  tore 
exposing  the  child  to  show  it  to  five  neighbors  who  weie  to 
examine  whether  the  child  was  deformed  or  to  be  expo-<  d  on 
account  of  its  sickliness.  Diony^ius  llalicarnassus  adds  that  the 
father  was  obliged  to  bring  up  male  children  and  the  first-born 
daught'-r.  This  latter  statenitiit  ot  Dion.  liai.  (hM>  not  i'ully 
accord  with  the  first,  accordmg  to  which  all  (•lril(ir(ii  iu  :oie  being 
exposed  had  to  l)e  shcown  to  neighbors.  The  Twelve  Tables  also 
command  that  sickly  and  deformed  t  hiidren  "he  exposed.  The 
exposure  and  killing  ot  the  deformed  ^"  focduin  ac  turpe  pro- 
ditfium  "  '  w^as  even  ret>arded  as  a  sacred  dnt\',  h>t  the  state  mi^ht 
suffer  some  calamitw*"  lUit  lathers  acted  quite  ari)itrarri\'  on  this 
matter,  and  exposed  their  otl-pring  for  other  reasons  than  detor- 
mity  and  weakness,  as  for  instance  on  account  ot  })o\(^rty,  suspicion 
that  they  were  children  of  another  man,  etr.,  without  beini;  inter- 
fered with  by  the  state.  An  in>tance  oi  ex[josure  m  tlie  come- 
dians is  Terence,  IIccx.  \\\.  3,  40.  Dio  Cassins,  xlv,  i,  relates  that 
Octaviamus  was  intended  tor  t\\p(wntf  i)\-  hi>  tather  i'eiau>e  it 
had  been  announca-d  to  him  that  tl;e  ehild  would  heroine  the 
ruler  of  Rome,  and  Suetonius,  Orfav,  65,  rel.ites  that  the  child  of 
Julia,  grandchild  of  Augustus,  was  exposeci  hv  (oniu^ard  of  the 
emperor  because  born  in  adulterv.  The  tre<[Uent  o((-(nrrnce  of 
exposure  in   the   {)rovHices   is  attested   bv  Plnu-,  I\f>i.>i.  x,  71  sq.'" 

405  By  Uion.  H.il.,  Auti</.  Rom.  ii,  15. 

'*'^Cf.  Livv.  xxvii,  37;    Seneca,  Z)^ /Vf?  i,  i;:    "  portentosos  foetus  extin- 
guiimis,  liberos  quoque  si  del)iles  monstrosve  editi  sunt  merginius." 

^''■^  Cf.   Seneca,  (\^nty.  x,  .\.   15  sq. 


4 


In  the  imperial  period  tlie  cu.-tom  grew  so  that  the  state  felt  ccn- 
>tr  lined  to  declare  it  a  crime.  The  penalties  were  made  more  and 
more  severe  until  it  became  a  capital  otlence.""® 

As  xv^^wx^^  gesta  per  vivi  vietumquc,  L.  Octavius,  an  older  con- 
temporary of  Cicero,  proclaimed  an  edict  called  after  himy'6';7;/?^/a 
Octaviana:  "quod  \i  metusve  causa  gestum  erit.  ratum  non 
habeto."^"^ 

Conir.  ix,  4. 

Law  :    Lei  the  han.d.^  be  cut  olf  of  the  man  who  has  struck  his 

f  ithelX 

.\  tvrant  suiitmoned  to  his  citadel  a  fatht  r  with  his  two  sons, 
and  commanded  the  young  men  to  strike  their  tather.  One  of 
them  threw  himseb  headlong,  the  other  carried  out  the  command 
ot  the  tyr.trit  an<l  i>ein«^  received  into  his  friendship  killed  him 
and  received  .1  reward.  I  lib  hands  are  demanded  and  his  tather 
deiend>   hnn. 

In i untie  done  to  parents  were  regarded  as  atroces*^^  and  were 
in  th<'  iniix  ri.il  epoch  reterred  for  punishment  to  the  praefectus 
nrl'i>,  m  the  provinces  to  the  governor:  "sifilius  matrem  aut 
pairum  ( /.  c.  parentes  m  intinitmn,  grandparents,  etc.),  quos  vene- 
rari  oportet,  contunu-liis  1  this  iniuria  is  more  specifically 
detailed  as  (0)i:i(iii})i  and  puhare^  afficit,  vel  impias  manus  eis 
infert  ;  praetectus  urbis  delictum  ad  publicam  pietatem  pro  modo 
eius  \  iridicabit."*" 

Coiir.  X,  1. 

Let  tiiere  be  an  action  at  law  tor  injury. 

A  man  who  had  a  son  and  a  rich  enemy  was  tbund  slain  but 
despoiled  of  nothing  which  he  had.  The  young  man  persisted 
m  tollowing  the  rich  man  in  shabby  ;.4arments.  The  rich  man 
brought  him  to  a  court  of  justice  and  demanded  that  he  should 
.iccuse  him  if  he  had  any  suspicions.  The  poor  man  said  :  "I 
will  accuse  vou  when  I  can."  When  the  rich  man  became  a  can- 
didate tor  public  office  and  was  rejected  he  accused  the  poor 
man  ot  injury. 

408  Cf.  Keiii,  Crtminalr.,  pp.  44^-4- 

*(»'■•  Cf.   Rein.  l'rivatr.,\^\i,    503  sq.  ;     Cicero,   hi   T^rr.  i,  50;    lii,    65;    Ad 
Quint,  iratr.  i,  i,  :i  ;   Seneca,  Cojitr,  ix.  3. 
*'OCf.  Ulpum    vii..  v^  S. 
*^^  Cf.    Rein,  C)  nninalr ..  J).  3S2. 


.tib^^&iai^mmMakMiSa^mKaba^ 


98 


THE   THEMES    TREATED    BY   IHE    ELDER   SENECA. 


The  definitions  o{ inmria  m  the  successive  edicts  of  the  prae- 
tors, reaching  down  to  the  imperial  period,  ci)iua:!iLd  liic  decision 
that  ail  iiiiiiria  was  committed'  "  si  ad  invidiam  alicuius  veste 
hio-u'hr:  utatur  aut  s(inai:daant  si  barbani  deniittat.  etc., "*^*  since 
mourning'  earb  was  waun  t<»  indicate  tliat  a  criminal  acticii  was 
pending;  over  some  one.*^' 


BiBLiOiiRArnv. 

Bernhardy,  (irundriss  der  rumischeii  Liltciatiir.  l>iaun- 
scluveig.      1865. 

Blass,  Die  ofriechische  Beredsamkeit  in  dem  Zeitalter  von 
Alexander  bis  auf  Au;austus.     Berlm.      1865. 

,  Geschichte  der  attischen  Beredsamkeit.     Leipzi^;.     1887. 

Bursian.  Edition  of  Seneca.      Leipzig.      1857. 

Cuchevab  Histoire  de  Telocpience  romaine  depnis  la  mort  de 
Ciceron  jusqu'  a  I'avenement  de  I'empereur  Hadrien.      1893. 

Clinton,  Fasti  Hellenic!.     1851. 

Freeman,  History  of  F'ederal  Government.     1863. 

Friedlander,  Darstellung  der  Sittenoeschichte  Roms.      1890. 

Hulsebos,  De  educatione  et  institutione  apud  Romanos.     1875. 

Jebb,  The  Attic  Orators.      1876. 

Mayor,  Edition  of  Juvenal.      1880. 

Mommsen,   Romische  Geschichte. 

Monpeaux,  Les  Africains,  6tude  sur  la  litterature  Latine 
d'Afrique.     1894. 

Miiller,  H.  J.,  Edition  of  Seneca.  Vienna,  Prague,  and 
Leipzig.     1887. 

Niebuhr,  M.  Tullii  Ciceronis  orationum  pro  M.  Fonteio  et  {)ro 
Rabirio  fragmenta,  T.  Livii  Lib.  xci  tragmentum  plenius  et  emen- 
datius,  L.  Senecae  fragmenta  ex  membranis  Bibliothecae  Vati- 
canare.     Rome.      1S20. 

Rohde,  Der  griechische  Roman.      1876. 

Schanz,  Geschichte  der  romischen  Litteratur. 

Schott,  Edition  of  Seneca.      1627. 

■*^-Cf.  Digest.  [Piindecfae')  I,.  15  §  27,  dc  iniuria. 
*^'Cf.  Rein,  Cnnnnalr .,  p.  305. 


\ 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  BY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


99 


i 


Simcox,  A  History  of  Latin  Literature  from  Ennius  to 
Boethius.     1883. 

Sii>emihl,  Geschiclue  der  griechischen  Litteratur  in  der  Altx- 

andrinerzeit.     Leipzig.      t8q2, 

rcatfi'i.  Historv  of  Rnman  Literature.      1891. 

Thiele,  Hermagoras,  Ein  Beitrag  zur  Geschichte  der  Rhetorik. 
Strassburg.      1893. 

Westermann,  Geschichte  der  Beredsamkeit  in  Griechenland 
und  Run).     Leipzig.      1833. 

Periodicals. 

Dirksen.  Abhandlungen  der  Kdniglichen  Akademie  der  Wis- 
senschatten.     Berlm.      1847.     i,  |)p.  48-79- 

S})en!4el,  (iclehrte  Anzei<^rn  der  baynschen  Akademie  der 
Wissenschaften,      Ahmich.      1858.     Vol.  xlvii,  pp.  1-30. 

Kiessling,  Rheinisches  Museum.      1861.     Vol.  xvi,  pp.  50-61. 

S[)enoel.  Rheinisches  Must^um.     1863.     Vol.  xviii,  pp.  481-526. 

Morawski,  Zeitschrift  fiir  die  usterreichischen  Gymnasien. 
1 88 1.     Vol.  xliv,  pp.  1-12. 

Rhode,  Rheinisches  Museum.      1886.     Vol.  xli,  pp.  170-igo. 

Monographs, 

Bonnell,  De  mutata  sub  primis  Caesaribus  eloquentiae 
Romanae  condicione,  imprimis  de  Rhetorum  scholis,  commen- 
latK)  historiea.      Berlin.      1836. 

Spen.ocl,  Leber  das  Studium  der  Rhetorik  bei  den  Alten. 
Munich.      1842. 

Hotie,  De  Senecae  rhetoris  quattuor  codicibus  mss.  Schottianis 
ad   Krielericani   Haasium  professorem  Vratislaviensem  epistula. 

Gdrlitz.      1858. 

Koerber,   Leber  den  Rhetor  Seneca  und  die  romische  Rhetorik 

seiner  Zeit.     xMarburg.      1864. 

ivonitzer,  Quaestiones  in  Senecam  patrem  criticae.     Breslau. 

1864. 

Kiesslm^,     Beitrage    zur    Texteskritik    des     Rhetor    Seneca. 

Breslau.      1S64. 

Hoffmann,   Leber  eine  Admonter  Pergament-Handschrift  der 

Excerpte  des  alteren  Seneca.     Posen.     1867. 

Friedlander,  De  Senecae  controversiis  in  Gestis  Romanorum 
adhibitis.     Re^imonti.     1871. 


I) 


lOU 


THE  THEMES  TREATED  UY  THE  ELDER  SENECA. 


Sander,  Q-inestiones  in  Seiv^cain  rhetorein  synlacticae. 
Greifsw.ikl.      1S72. 

Gruppe,   Quaestiones  Annaeanae.     Sedini.      1S73. 

Sander,  Der  Sprachgebraiich  des  Rhetors  Annaeiis  Senec.i. 
No.  i.      Berlin.      1877. 

Buschaiann,  Charakteristik  der  ^^riccliischen  Rhetorik. 
Parchim.      187S. 

Leo,    Dj    Sciieoae    traq^oodiis    observationes    critical.      r,erlin. 

1S78. 

Karsten,  De  elocutione  rhetorica  ([ualis  invmitur  in  Annaei 
Senecae  siias oriis  el  controversiis.      Rotterdam.      18S1. 

Buschmann,  Die  "  eiitanis  terribles  "  unter  den  Rhetoren  des 
Seneca.      1883. 

Bannim,  De  rhetoribus  crraecis  a  Seneca  in  suasoriis  et 
controversiis  adhibitis.      Kreuzburi;.      1S85. 

Morawski.   De  rhetoribns  latinis.     Cracow.      iS()2. 

Hainnier,  Beitrii^^e  zu  den  19  L;ru,.scren  Qumtilianlschen  Dec- 
kimationen.     Mnnich.      1893. 

Marx.   Chauvinisnuisund  Schulreforni  ini  Akerthuni.      Breshm. 

1894. 


\  v> 


^^  \ 


VITA. 

Natus  sum  anno  MDCCCLXII  m  pago  Massachusetts,  in 
oppido  Beverly.  Lilteraruni  dementis  domi  imbutus  in  numerum 
discipulorum  Universitatis  Harvard  receptus  sum,  quae  anno 
MDCCCLXXXIV  testimonio  A.  B.  (mao^na  cum  laude)  me 
donavit.  Postea  per  sexennium  litteras  Latinas  Graecasque  in 
scholisinMassadiusettsetin  Baltimore docebam,nonnullis  quoque 
discipulis  singulis  mecum  adscriptis.  Cum  iam  in  docendo  versa- 
rer,sodalis  creatussum  seminarii  philologici  in  Universitate  Johns 
Hopkins  cuius  exercitationii)us  magna  cum  utilitate  mea  per  quat- 
tuor  annos  interfui.  Anno  MDCCCXCIV  ad  Universitatem 
Oxford  ir.e  contuli  ubi  litteris  antiquis  per  unum  annum  optram 
dedi.  ill.  prots.  Kllis  et  Macdonell  optimis  consiliis  me  adiuvanti- 
bus.  Deinde  in  (;ermainam  profectus  in  Universitate  Bonn  ill. 
prots.  Biiciieler  et  Usener  exercitationibus  adfui  aestate  anni 
MDCCCLXCV.  Ill  profs.  Gildersleeve,  Bloomfield,  Warren 
bene  de  me  meritis  gratias  ago  singulares  autem  Warren  qui 
semper  fautor    exstitit    studiorum  meorum  benignissimus. 


y 


lOO 


THE    THEMES    TREATED    BY    THE    ELDER    SENECA. 


Sander  O  laestioacs  in  Senooain  rhctorcni  syntactic. le. 
Greifswakl.      1S72. 

Gruppe,  Quaestiones  Annaeanae.     Sedini.      1S73. 

Sander,  Der  Sprachi^ebrauch  des  Rhetors  Annaeus  Seneca. 
No.  i.      Berlin.      1877. 

Buschniann,  Charakteristik  der  griechischen  Rhetorik. 
Parchim.      1878. 

Leo,    De    Scneoae    traoroediis    observationes    criticat-.      r)erbn. 

1878. 

Karsten,  De  elocutione  rhetorica  qualis  invmitur  in  Annaei 
Senecae  suasoriis  et  controversiis.     Rotterdam.      iSSi. 

Buschniann,  Die  "  cntants  ternbles  "  unter  den  Rhetoren  des 
Seneca.      1883. 

Baumm,  l)e  rhetoribus  crraecis  a  Seneca  in  suasoriis  ct 
controversiis  adhibitis.      Kreuzbur<;.      1885. 

Morawski.   De  rhetoribus  hitinis.     Cracow.      1X92. 

Hainnier,  Beitriij^e  zn  dt^n  19  groiseren  Oiuntiiianischen  Dec- 
kimationen.     Munich.      i8i;)3. 

Marx.  Chauvinisnuis  and  Schuirelorni  ini  Alterthum.      Breslau. 

1894. 


t     1=    t 


1'  ■<> 


VITA. 

N?^tns  sum  anno  MDCCCLXII  m  pa^ro  Massachusetts,  in 
oppich)  F>ev.Mly.  Litterarum  elenientis  domi  imbutus  in  numerum 
discii)uloruin  Universitatis  Harvard  receptus  sum,  quae  anno 
MDCCCI.XXXIV  testimonio  A.  B.  (ma<>na  cum  laude)  me 
donavit.  Postea  per  sexennium  litteras  Latinas  Graecasque  in 
schohsin  Massachusetts  etin  Baltimore  docebam,nonnuhis  quoque 
discipulis  sini.;ulis  mecum  adscriptis.  Cum  iam  in  docendo  versa- 
rer,sodaIis  creatussum  seminarii  philcjlogici  in  Universitate  Johns 
Hopkins  cuius  exercitationii)US  ma^na  cum  utilitate  meaperquat- 
tuor  annos  intertui.  Anno  MDCCCXCIV  ad  Universitatem 
Oxford  me  contuli  ubi  litteris  antiquis  per  unum  annum  operam 
dedi.  ill.  prots.  Kllis  et  Macdonell  optimis  consiliis  me  adiuvanti- 
bus.  Deinde  in  (;ermamain  profectus  in  Universitate  Bonn  ill. 
prots.  Bucheler  et  Usener  exercitationibus  adfui  aestate  anni 
MDCCCLXCV.  Ill  prots.  Gildersleeve,  Bloomfield,  Warren 
bene  de  me  meritis  oratias  ago  singulares  autem  Warren  qui 
semper  fautor    exstitit    studiorum  meorum  benignissimus. 


'V 


I 


4 


t 


I 


i 


■im 


f:^ 


m^ 


*r**^ 


) 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 

This  book  is  due  on  the  date  indicated  below,  or  at  the 
expiration  of  a  definite  period  after  the  date  of  borrowing,  as 
provided  by  the  rules  of  the  Library  or  by  special  arrange- 
ment with  the  Librarian  in  chsirge. 


DATE  BORROWED 

DATE  DUE 

DATE  BORROWED 

DATE  DUE 

<«kA.^ 

28Sep'44 

*PB  2  9  "SZ 

1 

•1 

C2a(t14l)M100 

COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0026051974 


\'   ^ 


C 


F  S 


It, 


»*-;.  ^m 


.'i^  ^•v- 


:.-•  *v  ■•'•    '••<• 


■••••"■■'•' 

r-V-.---   ;■■ 

^••-  >-| 

/>  ■•••.  •;' 

»4  ••  ••'•■    .  X 

:  iftfeif '••''''^ ' 


